O men, worship your Lord – who created you and those before you, so that you may become God-fearing – who made the earth a bed for you and the sky a roof, and sent down water from the sky, then through it brought forth, out of fruits, provision for you. So, do not set up parallels to Allah when you know. (Qur’an 21-22)

A review of verses linked together

The second verse of the Surah ‘Al-Baqarah’ provides the answer to the prayer made in the Surah Al-Fatihah: “Guide us in the straight path– that is to say, the guidance man has prayed for is present in this book, for the Holy Qur’an is from the beginning to the end a detailed account of the straight path. Then, the Surah proceeds to divide men into three groups according to whether they accept the guidance of the Holy Qur’an or not. Three verses speak of the true and God-fearing Muslims, who not only accept but also act upon the guidance, and the next two verses of those disbelievers who oppose it openly.

Then come thirteen verses dealing with the hypocrites who are hostile to this guidance, but, for the sake of petty worldly interests or in seeking to harm the Muslims, try to keep their disbelief concealed and to present themselves as Muslims. Thus, the first twenty verses of the Surah, in dividing men into three groups on the basis of their acceptance or rejection of the guidance, indicate that the proper criterion for dividing men into groups is neither race or colour, nor language nor geography, but religion. Hence those, who believe in Allah and follow the guidance He has provided in the Holy Qur’an, form one nation, and those who disbelieve form a different nation – the Holy Qur’an calls the former the ‘party of Allah’ and the latter – ‘the party of Satan’ (Qur’an 58:19-22)

Then, the present verses (21 and 22), addressing the three groups together, present the message for which the Holy Qur’an has been revealed. In asking men to give up the worship of created beings and to worship Allah alone, they adopt a mode of expression which not only makes an affirmation but also supports it with arguments so clear that even an average man, only if he uses his common sense, cannot help being convinced of the Oneness of God.

Commentary :

In starting the address, verse 21 uses the Arabic word An-nas, which signifies man in general, or man as such – so, the word covers all the three groups we have just mentioned. And the message delivered by the verse “Worship your Lord.” The Arabic word ‘Ibadah (worship) connotes expending all energies one has in total obedience to somebody, and shunning all disobedience out of one’s awe and reverence. (Ruh-al-Bayan) We have earlier explained the meaning of the word Rabb (one who gives nurture). Let us add that the choice of this particular name from among the Beautiful names of Allah is very meaningful in the present context, for the affirmation has thus been combined with the argument in a very short sentence. The word Rabb indicates that only He is, or can be, worthy of being worshipped, He is the final and absolute Cause of nurturing man – Who changes man through gradual stages of development from a drop of water into healthy, sentient and rational being, and Who provides the means for his sustenance and growth. This truth is so obvious that even an ignorant or intellectually dull man would, on a little reflection, not fail to see and admit that such a power of nurturing can belong only to Allah, and not to a created being. What can a creature do for man, when it owes its very existence to the Creator? Can a needy one come to the help of another? And if it appears to be doing so, the act of nurturing must in reality and ultimately belong to the One Being on whom both have to depend in order to exist at all. So, who else but the Rabb can be worthy of adoration and worship?

The sentence is addressed to all the three groups of men, and for each it has a different meaning. “Worship your Lord”: the phrase calls upon the disbelievers to give up worshipping created beings and to turn to the Creator; it asks the hypocrites to be sincere and true in their faith; it commands the sinning Muslims to change their ways and try to be perfect in their obedience to Allah; and it encourages the God-fearing Muslims to be steadfast in their worship and obedience, and to make a greater effort in the way of Allah (Ruh-al-Bayan).

The two verses proceed to enlarge upon the theme by specifying 6 certain special qualities of the Rabb: “He created you and those before you.” This is a quality which one cannot even imagine to belong to a created being, for it can pertain only to the Creator – that is, the quality of giving existence to what did not exist before, and of producing from the darkness and filth of the mother’s womb a creature as lovely and noble as man.

In adding to the phrase: “who created you” the words, “and those before you,” the verse shows that Allah alone is the Creator of all mankind. It is also significant that the verse mentions only “those before you” and not “those who will come after you”, and through this omission suggests that there will not be any Ummah (a traditional community formed by all the followers of a prophet) to succeed the Ummah of the Holy Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), for no prophet will be sent down after the Last Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) , and hence no new ‘Ummah‘ will arise.

The final phrase of verse 21 has been translated here as “so that you may become God-fearing”. It may also be translated to mean “So that you may save yourselves from hell”, or “So that you may guard yourselves against evil.” But the point is that one can hope to attain salvation and paradise only when one worships Allah alone, and does not associate anyone else with Him.

Before we proceed, we must clarify a very important doctrinal point. The phrase La’allakum Tattakhun which has been translated here as “so that you may become God-fearing” employs the Arabic particle I’alla which indicates an expectation or hope, and is used on an occasion when it is not definite that a certain action or event would necessarily be actualized. Now, if one does really possess ‘Iman (faith) and does really believe in tauhid, one would, in consequence definitely attain salvation and go to Heaven, as Allah Himself has promised. But here the certainty has been expressed in terms of an expectation or hope in order to make man realize that no human action by itself and in itself can bring salvation as a necessary reward. One can attain salvation and go to Heaven only by the grace of Allah alone. The ablility to perform good deeds, and ‘Iman itself is only a sign of divine grace, not the cause.

The next verse recounts some other qualities of Allah with regard to the act of nurturing, with the difference that while verse 21 spoke of the bounties of Allah pertaining to the human self, verse 22 speaks of those pertaining to man’s physical environment. Since man’s being basically has two dimensions, one internal (Anfus) and the other external (Afaq) the two verses, in a summary way, encompass all the kinds of blessings that descend on man from Allah.

Among the cosmic bounties, the first to be mentioned is the earth which has been made a bed for man. It is neither soft and fluid like water on which one cannot settle, nor hard like stone or steel that should make it difficult to be harnessed for man’s purposes, but has been given a middle state between the soft and the hard for man to utilize it conveniently in his daily life. The Arabic word, Firash (bed), which literally means ‘somethings spread out’, does not necessarily imply that the earth is not round, for the great globe of the earth, in spite of being round, appears to be flat to the onlooker, and the usual way of the Holy Qur’an is to describe things in an aspect which should be familiar to an average man, literate or illiterate, city dweller or rustic.

The other bounty is that the sky has been made like an ornamented and beautiful ceiling. The third is that Allah sent down water from the sky. This, again, does not necessarily mean that water comes down directly from the sky without the medium of clouds – even in everyday idiom, a thing coming down from above is said to be coming from the sky. The Holy Qur’an itself, on several occasions, refers to Allah sending down water from the clouds:

“Did you send it down from the clouds, or did We send it?” (Holy Qur’an 56:69)

“And- have sent down from the rain-clouds abundant water.” (Holy Qur’an 78:14)

The fourth bounty is to bring forth fruits with this water, and to provide nourishment to man from them.

The first three of these bounties are of an order in which man’s effort or action, his very being even, does not enter at all. There was no sign of man when the earth and the sky already existed, and clouds and rain too were performing their functions. As for these things, not even an ignorant fool could ever fancy that all this could be the work of a man or an idol, or of a created being. In the case of producing fruits and making them serve as nourishment for man, however, a simpleton may, on a superficial view, attribute this to human effort and ingenuity, for one can see man digging the earth, sowing the seed and protecting the plants. But the Holy Qur’an has, in certain verses, made it quite clear that human effort has nothing to do with the act of growing trees and bringing out fruits, for human activity accomplishes nothing more than removing the hindrances to the birth and growth of a plant, or protecting it from being destroyed. Even the water which feeds the plant is not the creation of the farmer – all he does is to make the water reach the plant at the proper time in a proper quantity. The actual birth and growth of the tree, and the putting forth of leaves, branches and fruits is the work of Divine Power, and of no one else. Says the Holy Qur’an :

“Have you considered the soil you till? Is it you that give them growth or We ?” (Holy Qur’an 56:63)

The only answer which man can find to this question posed by the Holy Qur’an is that undoubtedly it is Allah alone who makes the plants grow.

In short, this verse mentions four qualities of Allah which cannot possibly be found in a created being. Having learnt from these two verses that it is Allah, and no one else, who brings man into existence out of nothingness, and provides the means of his sustenance through the earth, the sky, the rains and the fruits, one cannot, if one possesses a little common sense, help acknowledging that Allah, and no one else, is worthy of all worship and obedience, and that the ultimate iniquity is to turn away from Him who made man exist and gave him the means of survival and growth, and to prostrate oneself before others who are as helpless as man. Allah has put man at the head of all His creatures so that the universe should serve him, while he should totally devote himself to the worship and remembrance of Allah and obedience to Him without distraction. But there are men so given to their indolence and ignorance that they forget the One God, and in consequence, have to serve a billion gods.

In order to rescue men from this slavery to others, the Holy Qur’an says at the end of this verse:

“So, do not set up parallels to Allah when you know.”

That is to say, once one has understood that, in reality, Allah alone is the Creator and the Provider, one will have also understood that no one else can be worthy of worship and of being associated with Allah as an equal or rival god.

To sum up, these two verses call men to what is the esseni-tial purpose of sending down all the Divine Books and all the prophets – Tauhid, or the affirmation and the worship of the one God.

Tauhid is a doctrine which has an all-pervading and radically transforming impact on every sphere of human life, internal as well as external, individual as well as collective. For, once a man comes to believe that there is only One Being who alone is the Creator, the Lord and Master of the universe, who alone is all-powerful and ordains the slightest movement of the smallest atom, and without whose will no one can harm or do good to another – such a man, rich or poor, in joy or sorrow, would always look only towards that One Being, and gain the insight to discover behind the veil of apparent causes the workings of the same Omnipotence.

If our modern worshippers of ‘energy’ only had some understanding of the doctrine of Tauhid, they would easily see that power resides neither in steam nor in electricity, but that the source of all powers is the One Being who has created steam and electricity. To know this, however, one must have insight. The greatest philosopher in the world, if he fails to see this truth, is no better than the rustic fool who saw a railway-train move at the waving of a green flag and stop at the waving of a red flag, and concluding that it was the power of the green and red flags that controlled the movement of the huge train, made an obeisance to them. People would laugh at the rustic, for he did not know that the two flags are merely signs, while the train is actually run by the driver, or, better still, by the engine. A more perceptive observer would ascribe the function to the steam inside the engine. But he who believes in the One God would laugh at all these wise men, for he can see through the steam, the fire and the water even, and discover behind the appearances the might of the One and Only Being who has created fire and water, and whose will makes them perform their allotted functions.

The Doctrine Of Tauhid : A source of peace in human life

Tauhid, the most fundamental doctrine of Islam, is not a mere theory, but the only effective way of making man a man in the real sense of the term – it is his first and last refuge and the panacea for all his ills. For the essence of this doctrine is that every possible change in the physical universe, its very birth and death is subject to the will of the One and Only Being, and a manifestation of His wisdom. When this doctrine takes hold of a man’s mind and heart, and becomes his permanent state, all dissension ceases to exist and the world itself changes into a paradise for him, as he knows that the enmity of the foe and the love of the friend equally proceed from Allah who rules over the hearts of both. Such a man lives his life in perfect peace, fearing none and expecting nothing from anyone: shower him with gold, or put him in irons, he would remain unmoved, for he knows where it comes from.

This is the significance of the basic declaration of the Islamic creed, or La Ilaaha Illallaah (there is no god but Allah). But, obviously, it is not enough to affirm the Oneness of God orally; one must have a complete certitude, and must also have the truth always present close to one’s heart, for Tauhid is to see God as one, and not merely to say that He is one. Today, the number of those who can respect this basic formula of the Islamic creed runs to millions all over the world – far more than it ever did, but mostly it is just an expense of breath: their lives do not show the colour of Tauhid; or otherwise, they should have been like their forefathers who were daunted neither by wealth nor by power, awed neither by numbers nor by pomp and show to turn their back upon the Truth – when a prophet could all by himself stand up against the world, and say: “SO try your guile on me, then give me no respite” (Al-Qur’an 17:195).

If the blessed Companions and their successors came to dominate the world in a few years, the secret lay in this Tauhid, correctly understood and practised. May Allah bless all the Muslims with this great gift!

We have seen that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) greeted his disciples like a Muslim, by saying: “Peace be unto you”, when he appeared before them after his so-called ‘resurrection’ (John 20:19). Muslims use the same words to greet, (but in Arabic): Assalaamu Alaikum.

We have also seen that the utterances of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) have been supportive of and predicting about the rise of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), and through him the belief Islam and the believing nation of Muslims, to which his followers are required to join.

In John 16: 12 & 13, Jesus says:

“I have yet many things to say unto you,

but you cannot bear them now.

Howbeit when he, the spirit of truth, is come,

He will guide you into all truth; ”

In forthcoming posts , will see that this prophecy by Prophet Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) refers to Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), whose arrival his followers were directed to await. The many things that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) would have liked to tell his followers have not been told to them, not because Jesus did not know them, but only because his followers were not ready to bear them at that time: “….. but you cannot bear them now.”

When Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) states “you cannot bear them now”, it only refers to his followers and does not include himself, because he did not say: “WE cannot bear them now”.

Since Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) didn’t count himself among them in this matter, it means he was ready to bear them: the guidance that the expected prophet will bring. He was aware of them and he was ready to bear them. But did he follow in action what he knew and was ready for? Yes. He did much of what a Muslim would do and is expected to do. In fact, this begins to happen even while he anticipates arrest by the Roman rulers.

He comes to know that he will be betrayed by one of his disciples, Judas, into the hands of the Jews, who intended to kill him. Apart from this, the other thing that makes him sorrowful is that he was expecting to do many things that a Muslim does. He was looking forward to the joy of doing all those things; but now his end is staring on the face. He tells his disciples:

The one thing that he can surely do, before he is arrested, is to pray to the Lord as a Muslim prays. So he prays like a Muslim and does prostration (Sajda), touching his forehead to the ground:

“And he went a little further, and fell on his face, and prayed….” (Matthew 26:39) What is his prayer to the Lord? The verse (Matthew 26:39) continues: “…saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as you will.”

Mark 14:36 says about his prayer: “And he said, Abba, Father, all things [are] possible unto thee; take away this cup from me: nevertheless not what I will, but what you will.”

Luke 22:42 says about Jesus’ prayer: “Saying, Father, if you be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but your, be done.”

The common thing observed from the above verses is: Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) prays to the Lord to save him from the anticipated persecution at the hands of the Jews; yet not as Jesus wishes but as the Lord wills. Do you realize what Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) is stating at this moment? He subdues his wishes and submits himself to the will of Allah. In other words, Jesus declares his Islam, submission, at that moment.

A Muslim is onewho has submitted to the will of Allah. Islam means submission (to the will of Allah), while it also means Peace. Thus, by declaring his submission to the will of Allah, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) declared himself to be a Muslim.

“ Say (O Muslims): We believe in Allah and that which is revealed unto us and that which was revealed unto Abraham, and Ishmael, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the tribes, and that which Moses and Jesus received, and that which the Prophets received from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and unto Him we have surrendered. ” (2:136)

Thus, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) practiced Islam, i.e., Submission

and he got Islam, i.e., Peace. How?

The Bible tells us in Luke 22:43

“ And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.”

This is in appreciation of his act of Submission and as an answer to his prayers. The strength at that moment but what he needed most desperately was solace and assurance from the Lord that he would be saved from the arrest and wanted the freedom to perform the things he wanted to do as a Muslim.

So, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) the Muslim (peace be upon him) had prayed in ARABIC: “Yaa Ilaahi, Yaa Ilaahi, Lima Sabaqtanee? ”. Does the phrase sound familiar?? Yes, this is what he asked the Lord at that moment. “O my Lord, O my Lord, Why have you advanced me (in my end)?? ”

Since he wished to do important things which a Muslim must do while he is still alive, the threatened end troubles him. So his prayer: “ O my Lord, O my Lord, Why have you ADVANCED ME? ”

Having not understood what he said, but actually having misunderstood what he said, the writers of the Gospel shifted these words into a situation where it fitted according to their understanding and scheme. The prayer has thus been misunderstood and then quoted out of context.

He did not utter such words at the cross, where he was never taken. They say that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) said: “Eli, Eli, Lama Sabachtani? That is to say:My God, My God, why have youforsaken me? “(Matthew 27:46)

The prayer of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) did not go unanswered, but was answered through the angel, which appeared, in order to strengthen him. Luke 22:43: “ And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven, strengthening him.”

What message did the angel carry from the Lord, in reply to Jesus’ (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) question: “ O my Lord, O my Lord, Why have you advanced me? ”

Let us turn to Qur’an, 3:55:

“When Allah said: O Jesus! I will complete your (term)

and cause you to ascend unto Me

and cleanse you of those who disbelieve…”

Allah assures that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) will be saved from the Jews and that his term and what is destined for him is guaranteed for him and that Allah will cause Jesus to ascend unto Him. The Bible agrees that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) ascended unto heaven (Luke 24:51), but the main dispute is about what happened in between: the alleged crucifixion, death and resurrection of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

Allah says in Qur’an that they neither killed him nor crucified him, but it was made to appear so unto them. In many places in Qur’an, it has been mentioned that Jews used to kill the prophets unjustly. But in the case of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) it vehemently denies that they killed him or that they crucified him. This is because Qur’an will not contain anything except truth.

Surah 4, Verses 157 & 158:

“and their saying : we killed Christ Jesus, son of Mary, The messenger of Allah – but they killed him not, nor crucified him, but it was made to appear to them so; and those who disagree concerning it are full of doubts; they have no knowledge thereof save pursuit of a conjecture; For surely they killed him not; but Allah took him up unto Himself; and Allah is ever mighty, wise.”

From the sayings of Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), we get a more detailed account. The Muslim belief is that Allah changed the face of the person who betrayed Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , showing to the rulers the place where he was hiding, into a face resembling Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . So, they crucified that betrayer instead of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

Let us now do a deeper study of the above verses of Qur’an, so that we may be rightly guided into the truth. Allah says in Qur’an not only that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) was not killed, but also that he was not crucified, either. Those who do not accept the truth or those who accept only a part of the truth will never get at the truth.

As a result,

1. those who wish to prove that Jesus was crucified,but did not die at the cross; and

2. those who believe that Jesus was crucified and killed at the cross, have equally failed to convince and provide clear-cut answers to the many points that beg a solution.

Allah has said: “……and those who disagree concerning it are full of doubts.”

Those who disagree that he was neither killed nor crucified, are full of doubts.

So, before proceeding with our study, let us not disagree and let us not be in doubt any more. But let us fully believe in what Allah, The Exalted, says, so that we may be correctly guided. Allah says to Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), about Qur’an: “And We sent down the Book to you for the express purpose, that you should make clear to them those things in which they differ, and that it should be a guide and a mercy to those who believe.” (Qur’an 16:64)

Allah has said three things about the alleged crucifixion of Jesus:

1. They didn’t kill him.

2. They didn’t crucify him.

3. But it was made to appear to them so.

In the case of an affirmative sentence, like: “They killed him” , there is no doubt. Everything is clear. 1. The Offender 2. The Offence 3. The Offended. But once the word “NOT” comes in and makes it a negative sentence, like: “They DID NOT kill him”, there is a possibility to vary the meaning in three ways by shifting the stress alternatingly on the rest of the three words:

1. “They did not kill him” would mean that somebody else killed him.

2. “They did not kill him” in this context would mean that they just tortured him but did not kill him.

3. “They did not kill him” would mean that they killed somebody else.

We should remember that Qur’an is not denying the events wholesale by saying: “No. Nothing happened. Nobody did anything to anybody.” It is not saying so. Therefore, let us study further and consider for elimination, two out of the three possible variations of the sentence “They did not kill him” mentioned above.

There is no doubt as to The Offender. The Jews themselves claim to have done the deed and we all know of their complicity. Now the doubt remains about Two Things: The Offence and The Offended. About the second possibility that “They did not kill him” would mean that they crucified him but he escaped death, Allah denies that too. The next part of the verse eliminates that possibility by saying: They did not crucify him. Having eliminated the first two possibilities, only the third one survives: “They did not kill him.” Yes, it was not himthat they crucified and killed, but someone else. So, let us write that part of the verse, by putting the stress on the right word:

they did not kill him;

they did not crucify him;

but it was made to appear to them so.

It was made to appear to them that they crucified Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and killed him. They did not kill nor crucified Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam).

Having fully believed in Allah’s words, let us now move on to find evidence of the truth in The Bible in support of it.

1. First of all, while Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) was awaiting arrest by the soldiers, what he tells his disciples is that

a) “sleep on now, and take rest: it is enough, the hour is come; behold, the son of man is betrayed into the hands of the sinners.” (Mark 14:41)

b) “the son of man is betrayed to be crucified” (Matthew 26:2)

Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) never said he will be crucified, but only reveals the intention with which he will be betrayed: “betrayed to be crucified”.

2. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) says in Matthew 26:24: “The son of man goes as it is written of him: but woe unto that man by whom the son of man is betrayed! it had been good for that man if he had not been born”.

a) About himself, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) says: “The son of man goes as it is written of him ”; goes and not dies.

b) About the betrayer he says: “it had been good for that man if he had not been born”, a nice way of wishing death for the betrayer.

Even after this curse by the messenger of Allah, is there a way that the betrayer will continue to live?? Thus, in the above verse, it has been determined as to who is destined to go and who is destined to die.

3. The betrayer Judas comes in to identify Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , when it is dark, along with a large number of soldiers , carrying lanterns, torches and weapons. The stage is perfect for the change of form of the betrayer and the betrayed, as more confusion follows: From Mark 14:44, Matthew 26:48 and Luke 22:47, which are quoted below, it is proved that Judas drew near unto Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) to kiss him, so as to identify him.

Mark 14:44: And he that betrayed him had given them a token, saying, whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he; take him, and lead [him] away safely.

Matt 26:48: Now he that betrayed him gave them a sign, saying, whomsoever I shall kiss, that same is he: hold him fast.

Luke 22:47: And while he yet spoke, behold a multitude, and he that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went before them, and drew near unto Jesus to kiss him.

From John 18:3 to 18:6 which is mentioned below, we come to know of another enabling factor:

18:3. Judas, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests, comes inside with lanterns and torches and weapons.

18:4. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should happen to him, went forth, and said unto them, whom do you seek?

18:6. As soon as he had said unto them, I am [he], they went backward, and fell to the ground.

From verse 6 above, we notice one strange thing: as soon as Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) identifies himself, “I am (he)”, the great crowd that had come in falls to the ground. As Judas stood near Jesus (after kissing him) and as the crowd fell to the ground along with the lanterns they brought, the situation was perfect for the exchange of faces, so that those who came to arrest him do not notice it. Then the soldiers, who came to arrest Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , take away Judas instead, while Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) escapes along with his other disciples, who all fled the scene.

Mark 14:50: And they all forsook him, and fled.

(The readers of Bible normally take it to mean that the disciples forsook Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) and fled. It is shameful to think that all the disciples of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) forsook him at the most crucial hour of his life. Qur’an testifies that the disciples expressed their belief and loyalty:

“But when Jesus sensed disbelief from them, he said: Who will be my helpers in the cause of Allah? The disciples said: We will be Allah’s helpers. We believe in Allah, and bear you witness that we have surrendered (unto Him).” (3:52)

Therefore, it was Judas whom the disciples rightly forsook and all of them fled with Jesus.)

4. Now Judas is caught in an unbelievable situation, which nobody else would have experienced. Even if he tells the truth, nobody will believe it, but only think him to be Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) trying to escape death. So it is better for him that he endures whatever happens. Some verses from the Bible are quoted below, to show how Judas behaves at the trials at the high priest’s place. Whenever you encounter below the name Jesus, in the biblical verses, you have to take it as Judas, so that you may understand what the people on the scene and people in the past 2000 years have failed to comprehend.

John 18:19 to 18:23

18:19 “ The high priest therefore asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his teaching.

18:20 Jesus answered him, I spoke openly to the world; I always taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, where the Jews always meet; and in secret have I said nothing.

18:21 Why ask you me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said.

18:22 And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand (or with a rod), saying, Answer you the high priest so?

18:23 Jesus answered him, if I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smite you me? ”

Thus the betrayer-in-a-dilemma Judas speaks evasively. He cannot preach what Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) used to preach in the temple and in the synagogue. He neither has the authority nor the ability to repeat what Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) used to preach. Anyway, he certainly cannot answer them if they question him further in religious matters. Had it really been Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , he would not have missed the opportunity to tell the priests of his teachings. But here, Judas evades the issue by saying: “I always spoke openly; I said nothing in secret; Ask them which heard me; they know what I said; If I spoke well, why you smite me.” etc.

Matthew 26:

26:62 “And the high priest stood up, and said unto him, Answer you nothing? What is it, which these witness against you?

26:63 But Jesus held his peace. And the high priest said unto him, I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the Son of God.”

When some false witnesses testify against Jesus (Judas), the high priest begs Judas for an answer. But Judas remains quite. Then what the priest presses Judas to answer is not whether he is guilty or not but “I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ”.

So the main question raking their brains is whether this person really is Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

26:64 “Jesus said unto him, You have said: nevertheless I say unto you, Henceforth you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power, and coming on the clouds of heaven.”

Judas does not say “I am Jesus”, but lets the priest take as true what he thinks, by saying: “You have said” and then continues “Henceforth you shall see the Son of man sitting at the right hand of Power” instead of speaking in the first person “henceforth I shall sit at the right hand of Power.”

Then they condemn him to death by holding him guilty of blasphemy. One more thing you must note now is that in this session, the process of disfiguring Judas’ face has slowly begun.

26:67 Then did they spit in his face and buffet him: and some smote him with the palms of their hands (or rods). This is quoted also in Luke 22:64.

5. Peter, who apparently witnessed what happened at the time of arrest, follows Judas to the priest’s hall, so as to see what happens to Judas. The priest’s servants come and question Peter three times whether he is a disciple of that person, (deeming Judas to be Jesus), but he, naturally, denies all the three times, as predicted by Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . Peter who was very loyal to Jesus and had told Jesus (in Matthew 26:35) “Even if I must die with you, [yet] will I not deny thee.” had to deny the person thrice because he cannot affirm to be the disciple of Judas, whom they deem to be Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

6. Another account of the second session with the priests that took place on the day after the arrest, is given in Luke 22:66 to 68 :

22:66: And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying,

22:67 Are you the Christ? Tell us. And he said unto them, if I tell you, you will not believe:

22:68 And if I also ask [you], you will not answer me, nor let [me] go.

Again, they want to know if he is Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . And he tells them: If I tell you (that I am Judas), you will not believe. And if I ask you (what happened to Jesus), you will not answer me, nor let me go.

7. In the trial that takes place before the governor Pilate, again the dominant question is: Are you the Christ?? And most of the time Judas says: YOU say it. (That is YOUR statement, NOT MINE.) On other occasions, he remains silent like a stone. Please refer Luke 23:3, Mark 15:2, Mark 15:5, Matthew 27:11, Matthew 27:12. Matthew 27:14.

8. Jesus (Judas) is brought for trial before another official Herod:

Luke 23:8 and Luke 23:9:

23:8 And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.

23:9 Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing.

Poor Herod, he has been longing to witness some of the miracles that he had heard Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) performing. But can Judas perform those miracles? On the other hand, he avoids talking straight to even somebody who is sympathetic and glad to see him, because he is not what Herod deems him to be: he is not Jesus.

9. By talking evasively and at times refusing to talk, Judas somehow managed to avoid being found guilty by the Governor and other officials. But the Jews do not wish to lose face by retreating from the actions already taken to have Jesus killed. Hence, upon their stubborn insistence, he is condemned to be crucified. Before they take him to the cross, more injury is done to him:

Mark 15:19: And they smote him on the head with a reed, and did spit upon him.

Matthew 27:30: And they spit upon him, and took the reed, and smote him on the head.

Please note that after first injuring his FACE, now it is the turn of his HEAD to be injured. Judas is killed at the cross and later on buried. John does not add dramatic words to this scene of crucifixion, but quotes what could be reasonable words from the betrayer, while he dies:

1. “ I thirst! ” (John 19:28)

2. “ It is finished! ” … and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost. (John 19:30)

10. The Bible records that Mary (Bibi Maryam), Jesus’ (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) mother, was a witness to the crucifixion.

John 19:25 “Now there stood by the cross of Jesus, his mother…. ”

While the Bible records the reaction of every bystander and passer-by, it fails to mention the reaction of Mary (Bibi Maryam) the mother of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , because there was no reaction from her worth mentioning. Since she knew that the person on the cross was not Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , she stood by the cross and just watched the punishment meted out to the betrayer of Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . Had the person on the cross really been Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , she would have reacted hysterically. Because it was she who bore Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) with difficulty and delivered him with pains. No mother will be a mute spectator to such an event.

Qur’an records the labour pains of Mary, while she delivered Jesus:

“ And the pangs of childbirth drove her unto the trunk of the palm tree. She said: Oh, would that I had died before this and had become a thing forgotten.” (Qur’an 19:23)

11. The Bible says that Jesus addressed his mother from the cross as “ Woman! ” (John 19:26). No mean person will address his mother as “Woman! ”. It is only because the person on the cross was Judas and not Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) that he addresses Mary as “ Women! ” Qur’an testifies that Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) was kind to his mother and said from his cradle: “ And (God has made me) dutiful toward her who bore me, and has not made me arrogant, unblest. ” (Qur’an 19: 32)

12. And where is Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) when all this happens. Jesus had predicted, in Matthew 12:40

“for as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.”

Do you know which is the heart of the earth? Before thinking further, let us consider what is the function of a heart.

It draws blood from other parts of the body for purification and again sends it back to all the parts. Right? Can you think of a place on the earth, which draws people from all parts of the earth and sends them back, too, after purifying them? And that too at a regular interval, just like the heart?

Yes, you guessed it right: it isMakkah.

It is the belief of Muslims that all the prophets wished to be a follower of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), in preference to be born as a prophet. Only Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) was granted the wish. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) is expected to descend on the earth again, supported by two angels, during the reign of the expected guided leader Mahdi. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) will live as one of the followers of Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and follow the Shariah (laws) brought by Prophet Muhammad. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) knew that he would live as a Muslim when he comes back to the earth. But he could not wait, as we now know, not less than twenty centuries to relish this. So, when he knows that his days in the earth are not many, he formally submits himself to the Lord, starts to pray like a Muslim, does prostration and now goes on a pilgrimage to Makkah. (This may not be the first time Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) is praying like a Muslim. Qur’an records what Jesus spoke from his cradle: “And (God) has made me blessed wheresoever I may be, and has enjoined upon me prayer and almsgiving so long as I remain alive.” (19: 31).

(Earlier, he had prayed to the Lord for the Muslims, in the following manner:

John: 17:20 & 21: 21.

17:20 Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word;

17:21 That they all may be one; as thou, Father, [art] in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me).

And as predicted, he was in the heart of the earth for three days and three nights.

13. THE JEWS IN A DILEMMA:

Now let us imagine the restlessness of the Jews after the soldiers brought Judas, thinking him to be Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . While, according to them, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) is in their custody, what happened to their man, Judas? Why did he not turn up to win accolades from them, for the great betrayal he committed, in order to please them. This must have greatly disturbed them. Anyway, where is Judas?

The answer to this was provided to them by the other disciple, who was known to the high priest, and made possible the entry of Peter into the palace.

“John 18:15 : And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and [so did] another disciple: that disciple was known unto the high priest, and went in with Jesus into the palace of the high priest.

John 18:16 But Peter stood at the door without. Then went out that other disciple, which was known unto the high priest, and spake unto her that kept the door, and brought in Peter.”

That other disciple sounded the high priest of what happened at the time of arrest, but since it is an unbelievable event for everyone, they wanted to elicit information from Judas and, hence, kept on enquiring Judas, whether he is really Christ. On the basis of the information provided by the other disciple, the high priest’s people tried thrice to rope in Peter for enquiry, by sending female servants to talk to him, but he craftily refused to yield. The Jews were in a terrible dilemma.

1. Now they have to kill a person who co-operated with them against Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . The fellow is not even trying to save himself, being unable to overcome the humiliation wrought on him by the Lord.

2. If they disclose the truth and spare Judas, they have to bear the shame of having failed to kill Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . So they decided to kill Judas and claimed to have killed Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

Now, they face another problem: How to account for the missing Judas. So, their soldiers removed Judas’ body from the grave, while everybody was observing the Sabbath – (the compulsory Jewish holiday on Saturdays.) Then they disfigure the face more, because that is the only thing that has the resemblance of Jesus. After this is done, he is now perfectly Judas. To account for the injury to the face and the head, they spread the news that is reported in Acts 1:18:

“Acts 1:18 Now this man obtained a field with the reward of his iniquity; and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”

Is it not enough that they have disfigured his head and face? What is the necessity to cut open his stomach and spread the news that: “ he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out.”

So that, because of the nasty stench it would produce, nobody can come near the body and notice or find out the minor injuries that Judas suffered at the cross.

The cause of death should be very apparent from a distance, in order to avoid a close scrutiny by curious people.

The fact that all this was done by the Jews, by bribing the watchmen or the soldiers, is recorded in Matthew 28:11 to 28:15

“Matthew 28:11: Now when they were going, behold, some of the watch came into the city, and informed unto the chief priests all the things that were done.

28:12 And when they were assembled with the elders, and had taken counsel, they gave large money unto the soldiers,

28:13 Saying, Say you, His disciples came by night, and stole him [away] while we slept.

28:14 And if this come to the governor’s ears, we will persuade him, and secure you

28:15 So they took the money, and did as they were taught: and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day.”

And to make it appear that it was really Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) whom they arrested and to make the people believe that Judas was roaming freely after the arrest took place, they spread the lie that he came to the temple and threw back the silver coins he received as bribe from them:

“Matthew 27:5: And he cast down the pieces of silver in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself.” That this verse is a total lie is borne by the fact that the other accounts talk of Judas falling headlong and his bowels gushing out. (Acts 1:18)

14. In respect of the later events:

a. at the grave where they buried Judas and

b. where Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) meets his disciples, etc.

we find a lot of difference in the narration of Luke, John, Matthew and Mark, just as in respect of the earlier events. It is a waste of time counting and comparing the different and conflicting details. Hence, only those details that are important in view of the truth revealed above are mentioned.

15. a) When Mary Magdalene goes to the grave; she finds that the stone covering the grave of Judas is already removed.

“Mark 16:3 And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?

16:4 And when they looked, they saw that the stone was rolled away: for it was very great.

16:5 And entering into the sepulchre, they saw a young man sitting on the right side, clothed in a long white garment; and they were affrighted.”

Points to be noted in the above verses:

1. The heavy stone was already rolled away by the soldiers of the governor.

b) Mary Magdalene sees two angels in white sitting. (John 20:12) Just as the Muslims believe that The Almighty will provide two angels for Jesus’ (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) descent from heaven, when he comes again, similarly these two angels have made possible his pilgrimage to Makkah.

c) Luke 24:4 & 24:5

24:4 And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout, behold, two men stood by them in shining garments:

24:5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down [their] faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the living among the dead?

The two men in shining garments are angels, who refer Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) as the living, and not as the resurrected.

d) John 20:14: “And when she had thus said, she turned herself back, and saw Jesus standing, and knew not that it was Jesus.

Points to be noted: She saw Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) standing, and knew not that it was Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , because she supposed him to be the gardener. She could not recognize Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) , because of the changed face and deemed him to be the gardener because of the simple cloths worn while performing pilgrimage rites. Moreover, he would have had a shaven head, another rite of the pilgrimage.

However, when Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) meets his disciples later, he asks them to touch him and handle him, but here he forbids her. The reason: As a good Muslim, he avoids being touched by the lady.

That means he knew that he was supposed to ascend only, as the Almighty had already informed him through the angel. His statement shows that he did not expect himself to die, nor resurrect, but only ascend.

f) The same day evening, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) appears before his disciples and says: “Peace be unto you”, (i.e., Assalaamu Alaikum,) as a Muslim. .

g) Luke 24:13 to 24:24 is quoted below. In this event, two disciples walking together while going to a village, are joined by Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) . Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) enquires them as to what they are talking and why they are sad. They narrate the whole story from being condemned to death to the vision of angels at the sepulchre. If it were Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) who suffered all that, then he would not pretend ignorance and listen again to all that which he himself has suffered, as they think. Only because he was absent and went on the pilgrimage to Mecca, he did not know of what happened in his absence and, hence, he is enquiring and listening to the whole story.

Luke 24:13 And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village called Emmaus, which was from Jerusalem [about] threescore furlongs.

24:14 And they talked together of all these things which had happened.

24:15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed [together] and reasoned, Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.

24:16 But their eyes were holden that they should not know him.

24:17 And he said unto them, What manner of communications [are] these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and are sad?

24:18 And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come to pass there in these days?

24:19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said unto him, Concerning Jesus of Nazareth, which was a prophet mighty in deed and word before God and all the people: 24:20 And how the chief priests and our rulers delivered him to be condemned to death, and have crucified him.

24:21 But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel: and beside all this, to day is the third day since these things were done.

24:22 Yea, and certain women also of our company made us astonished, which were early at the sepulcher;

24:23 And when they found not his body, they came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of angels, which said that he was alive.

24:24 And certain of them which were with us went to the sepulcher, and found [it] even so as the women had said: but him they saw not.”

This is another proof that it was Judas who suffered death at the cross.

h) Back in Jerusalem, Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) has another session with the eleven disciples:

1. “Luke 24:36: And as they thus spoke, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and says unto them, Peace [be] unto you.

24:37 But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.” Having seen the dead body of Judas, they were now 100 % sure of his death. Hence, when Jesus appears there with Judas’ face, they are terrified and affrighted and supposed that they had seen a spirit.

2. Luke 24:38: “And he said unto them, Why are you troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts?

24:39 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have.

24:40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them [his] hands and [his] feet.”

John repeats similarly in 20:20 :

John 20:20: “And when he had so said, he shewed unto them [his] hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord.”

From the above, we can understand fully well, that Jesus’ face is not the identity of the person, at that moment, because it looked like Judas’. Hence, “Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself” and “when they saw his hands and his sides they were glad they saw the Lord ”

3. Luke 24:41 “ And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat?

24:42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb.”

Fish is the only thing that a Muslim can obtain from anyone and eat. The meat of other (permitted) animals and birds should be properly slaughtered in the manner taught by Prophet Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and by mentioning the name of Allah over it, while slaughtering. Hence, the other meat cannot be obtained from everybody.

4. John 20:30 “And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book.”

Most important of which should be: restoration of his face, as it looked before.

The Bible does provide a clue that Jesus’ (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) face was restored to its original appearance, before his ascension unto heaven.

In the verse of John 21:12, which is in the context of the events just before his ascension, it is written:

“ Jesus saith unto them, Come [and] dine. And none of the disciples durst ask him, Who art thou? knowing that it was the Lord.” This time, there is no need to see his hands and his feet to know that it is Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) .

Now, it is time to thank the Almighty for opening our eyes to the truth, by accepting Islam. We now know for certain that:

1. There is no one worthy pf Worship except Allah; and

2. Muhammad (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) is a slave and a messenger of Allah and the last of the prophets, whom all the people have to follow. This has been foretold in The Bible.

3. Idols and graven images are forbidden.

4. Allah sent messengers to all nations.

5. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) too is a slave and a messenger of Allah, but sent only for (the lost sheep of) the house of Israel.

6. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) is a creation of Allah; he is not His son and has no portion whatsoever in His Sovereignty.

7. Jesus (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) was not killed, nor crucified. It was his betrayer who was killed on the cross.

The next time you see a cross, you would know that it is not a sign that relates to Jesus, but something that denotes the punishment his betrayer deserved and got.

But…, should we have a memorial to commemorate the betrayer of a mighty messenger of Allah ?

Qur’an: 5: 83 to 86.

83. When they listen to that which has been revealed unto the messenger, you see their eyes overflow with tears because of their recognition of the truth. They say: Our Lord, we believe; write us down as among the witnesses.

84. How should we not believe in Allah and that which has come unto us of the truth and we hope that our Lord will admit us to the company of the righteous folk.

85. Allah has rewarded them for what they said: Gardens underneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the reward of the good people.

86. But those who disbelieve and deny Our signs, they shall be companions of hell-fire.

The intrigues of the Kuffâr against Islam and Muslims, the correspondence of which to unfolding events being too glaring to doubt, are accurately delineated in the preceding Zionist excerpt.

The Kuffâr do not fear the Muslims per se. They do not fear the speculative opinions of misguided individuals. But what they do fear, indeed, is the justice of Islâm and the equity of its Sharî‘ah. Islam did not ascend to glory, conquering the hearts of men and the world, from China to Spain, in some juridical and legislative vacuum. Islâm did not rule over the world without a comprehensive system of law. It was the Madhâhib of the illustrious Fuqahâ’ that gave to the Islamic Khalîfates of times gone by the sovereignty, justice, and advancement that Muslims are so rightly proud of. It is ‘ that ’ Sharî‘ah that is feared, not the Sharî‘ah of ‘ revisionist ’ Islam. Wahhâbîsm or Salafism offered the enemies of Islam the ideal opportunity, in the guise of ‘fundamentalist tawhîd ’, to subvert the supremacy of the Sharî‘ah symbolized by the Khalîfate. But Wahabism, with its treachery, subterfuge and blood-stained history, would always be totally unacceptable to the overwhelming majority of Muslims the world over. So Wahhâbîsm had to coin a new identity, free from its reputation of the past. It was to be given credibility by the very name of its orthodox adversaries, the Pious predecessors (Salaf as-Sâlihîn). The new name …… ‘ Salafîsm ’

The modern day Salafiyyah claim to take their name from the celebrated Hadîth of the Holy Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) who said : ‘

The best of people are my generation, thereafter those who follow them, and thereafter those who will follow them. (Bukhârî)

These first three generations of the true believers are known as the ‘Salaf as-Sâlihîn’ (The Pious Predecessors), hence, they have derived an epithet from this Hadîth and, as such, call themselves ‘Salafis’ or ‘Salafiyyah’.

The ‘Salafiyyah’ were, in fact, dissenters from the Hanbalî Madhhab who simply misappropriated the name ‘Salafiyyîn’. Abu’l Faraj ibn al-Jawzî al Hanbalî (d.508/1114) (not Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah) and many other prominent scholars of the Hanbalî Madhhab, unequivocally declared that these dissenters were not the adherents of the ‘Salaf as-Sâlihîn’ neither were they specifically of the Hanbalî Madhhab, but were rather mubtadi‘în (heretical innovators), belonging to the dissident group of Mujassimah (a deviant sect who believed that Allah was a material body). In the seventh century after Hijrah, Ibn Taymiyyah pursued this blasphemous fitnah (mischief) anew.

Before Ibn Taymiyyah and Ibn al-Qayyim , there was not any Madhhab whatsoever called ‘Salafiyyah’, nor even the word ‘Salafiyyah’ used. In order to inveigle the unsuspecting Muslim masses and to persuade the youth that they were on the ‘ straight path ’. The name ‘ Salafiyyah’ from the term ‘Salaf as-Sâlihîn’ (The Pious Predecessors), was forged, so as to give credence to their corrupt ideas and seduce the unenlightened. They incriminated the true orthodox Islamic scholars, who were the successors of the Salaf as-Sâlihîn, accusing them of bid‘ah (innovation in religious matters) and of dissenting from their contrived touchstone, ‘Salafiyyah’. Ibn Taymiyya was advanced as a Mujtahid, the ‘champion’ who revived the path of the ‘Righteous Predecessors ’. And its latter-day champion was to become Muhammad Nâsir ud-Dîn al-Albânî.

The neo-Khârijîte nature of Wahhâbi-Salafîsm makes it intolerant of all other forms of Islamic expression. Because it has no coherent fiqh of its own – it rejects the orthodox Madhâhib – and has only the most basic and primitively anthropomorphic ‘aqîdah, it has a fluid, amoeba-like tendency to produce divisions and subdivisions among those who profess it. No longer are the Islamic groups essentially united by a consistent Madhhab (Ash ‘arî and Ahl as-Sunnah ) ‘aqîdah (doctrine). Instead, they are all trying to define the Sharî‘ah and ‘Aqîdah from the Qur’ân and the Sunnah by themselves. The result is the appalling state of division and conflict which disfigures the moderm Salafî condition.

Muhammad Nâsir ud-Dîn al-Albânî is described by many orthodox scholars as the the arch-innovator of the Salafîs in the modern age. A watch repairman by trade, al-Albânî is a self-taught claimant to Hadîth scholarship who has no known mentor in any of the Islamic sciences and has admitted not to have memorized the Book of Allah nor any book of hadîth, fiqh, ‘aqîda, usûl, or lughah. He achieved notoriety by attacking the great scholars of the Ahl al-Sunnah (Normative Islam) and reviling the science of fiqh with exceptional malice towards the school of his father who was a Hanafî scholar.

Al-Albânî was born in the city of Ashkodera, the capital of Albania in 1914 C.E. While he was young his parents migrated to Damascus, Syria, during the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. His father, Shaykh Nûh al-Albânî, was, as stated, a strict Hanafî scholar under whom Al-Albânî studied tajwid or ‘Qur’anic recitation’ and perhaps the Hanafî fiqh primer Marâqî al-Falâh (‘The Ascents to Success’). It is likely that he also studied some other primary subjects in Hanafî fiqh under Shaykh Muhammad Sa‘îd al-Burhânî, who taught in the Al-Tawbah Masjid near his father’s shop, in the quarter of the Turks on the side of Mount Qâsiyûn.

Popular belief has it that at an early age he was captivated by the science of Hadîth and spent his time incessantly seeking knowledge of this science. Al Albânî deemed it to be more profitable to spend time in independent, unsupervised study of books and manuscripts at the famous library of Damascus, Al-Maktabat uz-Zâhiriyyah, and not attend the lectures of the acknowledged scholars of the day.

Al-Albânî has attained notoriety amongst scholars and students for his inadmissible reclassification and reappraisal of the Prophetic Hadîth . However, he does not seem to have been given any authorization (ijâzah) in Hadîth from any recognized scholar of Hadîth . He seems to have ‘taught himself’ the science of Hadîth.

As for his professed ijâzah or ‘warrant of learning,’ it is reported that a Hadîth scholar from Halab (Aleppo), Shaykh Râghib al-Tabbâkh , visiting the Dhâhiriyyah Library while in Damascus, was introduced to Al-Albânî who was pointed out to him as a promising student of Hadîth. After having spoken to him for a while it is said that the Shaykh conferred upon him a general ijâzah, even though Al-Albânî did not attend his lessons nor studied any book of Hadîth under his tutelage.

Indeed, Shaykh Râghib al-Tabbâkh had chains of successive mentors reaching all the way back to the authors of the foremost Hadîth as the Sahîh of al-Bukhârî works, such and the Sunan of Abû Dâwûd, and hence the prestige of a contiguous chain going back to the Holy Prophet. But this was an authorization (ijâzah) of tabarruk, or ‘blessing’, not a ‘warrant of learning’.

This type of authorization (ijâzah), that of tabarruk, is a known practice of some traditional scholars and is intended to serve as an encouragement to the student whom they have met and whom they find capable or hope will become a scholar.

Though the authorization be given and signed by a specialist scholar of Hadîth , it in no way makes the individual to whom it is issued a Hadîth scholar. The scholarly value of such ijâzahs is merely to establish that the two have met and to serve as an added impetus to pursue the course of study in the specified field.

In later life he was given Professorship of Hadîth at the Islamic University of Madînah. It is a known fact that Madînah university and like institutions within Saudi Arabia have been the mainstay in spreading Wahhâbî tenets throughout the world and calumniating the beliefs and practice of the Ahl asSunnah. Incidentally, the same is to be said of the Saudi-Wahhâbî inspired ‘ Râbitah al-‘Âlam al-Islâmî ’(Muslim World League) in Makkah who have hired and indoctrinated hundreds of ignorant men from every country to their way of thinking. These hirelings and their Saudi-Wahhâbî sponsored organisations, camouflaged as religious authorities, in turn become instrumental in propagating the heretical tenets of Wahhâbîsm which they often insidiously brand as ‘ The Fatwâ’s of world Muslim unity ’.

Al-Albânî was a rabid reviler of the Awliyâ’ (Friends of Allah) and the Sûfîyâ’. He was expelled from Syria then Arabia, and finally settled in Amman, Jordan, under house arrest until his death in 1999. He remains the object of devotion of the most strident innovators and self-styled ‘reformers’ of Islam.

Muhammad Nâsir ud-Dîn al-Albânî was especially influenced by the writings of the notorious Egyptian Freemasons, Muhammad Rashîd Ridâ (d. 1935 C.E.) and his mentor, Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh (d. 1905 C.E.) who was both Grand Muftî of Egypt and Grand Master of the United Masonic Lodge of Egypt. These individuals were noted for employing, to a great extant, the writings of Ibn Taymiyyah and his disciple Ibn al-Qayyim al Jawziyyah in furthering their nefarious Masonic agenda. The four abovementioned personalities held idiosyncratically corrupt beliefs (aqîdah) and legal positions on certain particularly contentious points, like the gross anthropomorphism’s attributed to Allah and the denial of the Orthodox Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence (Madhâhib).

It is a well known fact that Muhammad Rashîd Ridâ and his teacher Muhammad ‘Abduh, the grand Muftî of Egypt at the time, were both Freemasons, who endeavoured to reinterpret the Sharî‘ah, claiming to ‘ reform ’ Islam from ‘ extraneous accretions ’, which led to their call for the abandonment of Taqlîd; hence the need for the abolishment of the four schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. In reality, they represented the hypocritical element who fought against Islam from within. One of the greatest
impediments in the endeavor to ‘ modernise ’ Islam to conform to western standards of reason and its underlying agenda is the Shar’î demand for Taqlîd (ie. following a School of Islamic Law). Taqlîd is a thorn in their flesh and it has to be eliminated for the attainment of their pernicious goal. This conspiracy was realized by many scholars of their day and , as a result, many a man of knowledge exposed them for what they were, for example, Shaykh Muhammad Bâkhit al-Mutî‘î (d. 1935) – a grand Muftî of Egypt and one of the leading Hanafî scholars of his time.

During the administration of Muhammad Alî Pâshâ, the Ottoman governor of Egypt in the mid nineteenth century, ‘Abduh was brought to the board of management of the Jâmi’ al-Azhar, the prestigious institute of Islamic learning and scholarship which had for centuries educated Muslim savants. It was from then on that the Scotch Freemasons, having infiltrated, began to destroy Egyptian Muslims economically and spiritually. Through these Freemasons, the British were successful in demolishing, not just the spiritual and intellectual heritage of Egyptian Muslims, but also the mighty Ottoman Empire from within. Shaykh Muhammad ‘Abduh, incidentally, was the disciple of the notorious Freemason Jamâl ud-Dîn al-Afghânî, regarded as one of the chief architects of the ‘ revisionist ’ movement of his time. Al-Afghânî left an abiding impression of his ‘ reformist ’ ideas on the intelligentsia of Egypt and Constantinople (Istanbul), the Capital of the then Ottoman Empire. His contacts and discourses on ‘progressive’ Muslim philosophy, jurisprudence and religion couched in persuasive, deceptive language fired many young ‘ liberal ’ writers and scholars in Egypt and other parts of the Muslim world with a missionary anti-orthodox zeal. Not least effected by his writings were the secular ‘Young Turks’ who, under the leadership of a donmeh Jew named Mustafâ Kamâl Ataturk, went on to destroy the last vestiges of the Ottoman Khalîfate.

Al-Afghânî and ‘Abduh were ‘master and disciple’ and there exists no significant difference in their thought aside from Al-Afghânî being more erudite in nefarious Shî‘îsm and ‘Abduh in degenerate Tasawwuf. Al Afghânîs real name was Sayyid Jamâl ud-Dîn al-Asadabâdî. Asadabâd is a city in Iran, whose population is known to be 100 % Shî‘âh.

Al-Afghânî bears the ignominy of introducing the Nahj al-Balâgha in Egypt. This book is regarded by the Sh î‘âh as second in importance only to the Holy Qur’ân. It is a known fact that this book contains a large number of spurious and false sayings attributed to Sayyidinâ ‘Alî (radhiyallahu anhu). It contains the most abominable invectives against the august Companions of the Holy Prophet  including Sayyidinâ ‘Uth mân, ‘Â’ish ah, Talhah, Zubayr and Mu‘âwiyah (radhiyallahu anhuma). Worst still is that it reflects most negatively against Sayyidinâ ‘Alî (radhiyallahu anhu). since, by attributing to him those words, it implicates him in the most impious conduct and malevolent assertions against those noble personalities. ‘Abduh went so far as to prepare a commentary on Nahj al Balâghah so as to further popularize it.

Al-Afghânî and ‘Abduh also attempted to interpret Islamic history through the ideas and themes expressed in the book. In other words they had endeavored to teach Muslims a Shî‘îte version of Islamic history which is warped to say the least. Al-Afgh ânî and ‘Abduh tried their level best to convince Muslim scholars that the Sunnî-Sh î‘ah divide was merely the result of variations in their respective political stances, and that the so-called ‘Ja‘farî’ Sh î‘îte school of law must be accepted as legitimate (note that Imâm Ja‘far as-Sâdiq rahimahullah was a noble descendant of the Holy Prophet  and an upright Ahl as-Sunnah scholar).

As regards Hasan al-Bannâ, it is true that he was not a Wahhabî per se, but to consider him an Ahl us-Sunnah scholar or a Sûfî of note, as many do, is not correct. He was a teacher in an elementary school, initially a member of a Sûfî tarîqah and a high-ranking exponent of British Masonry in Egypt. He was a follower of the ‘reformist theory’, preached by Al-Afgh ânî and was vehemently opposed by Muslim Scholars and especially the Ottoman ‘Ulamâ’ of the day. He disassociated himself from his Qâdirî Tarîqah, believing that traditional Sûfîsm was old-fashioned, antiquated and irrelevant. His project was to create a ‘Muslim secret society’, a kind of ‘Islamic Masonry’. The British government actively supported him in much the same way it had sponsored Ibn Sa‘ûd, this primarily because of his subversive influence and antagonism towards the central Khalîfate.

After his demise, Sayyid Qutb assumed leadership of his movement. He, like al-Albânî as described earlier, was not a qualified scholar. His Tafsîr (Fî Dh ilâl al-Qur‘ân), is described by many scholars of note as a collection of the most absurd mistakes and baseless interpretations. What is most disconcerting about the commentary is its insults against the Sahâbah, especially its claims to correct “‘Uthmân’s (radhiyallahu anhu’s) inadequacies”, and its denial of the validity of the four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence.

When Egypt and Saudi Arabia were embroiled in the war for control of Yemen, the movement of Sayyid Qutb, the Muslim Brotherhood, began to depend on Saudi financing and thus became very much influenced by Wahhabîsm. Ever since they have been active in disseminating the Wahhabî creed and its literature worldwide, a more popular example being the printing and translation of a book called ‘Minhâj al-Muslim’ by Jâbir al Jazâ‘irî, which represents the quintessence of Wahhabîsm. Their organization (WAMY) also publishes ‘Fath al-Majîd’ by Ibn Abd al Wahhâb, the ‘gospel’ of Wahhabîsm.

To conclude, among al-Albânî’s absurdities and innovations in Religion are the following:

1) In his book Adab al-Zafaf he prohibits women from wearing gold jewelry – rings, bracelets, and chains – despite the Consensus of the Scholars of Islam permitting it.

2) He claims that it is permissible for menstruating women and those in a state of major defilement (junub) to recite, touch, and carry the Holy Qur’ân.

3) He declares it prohibited (harâm) and an innovation to lengthen the beard over a fistful’s length although there is no proof for such a claim in the entire corpus of Islamic Law.

4) He claims that whoever carries a tasbîh (rosary) in his hand to remember Allah is misguided and an innovator.

5) He absolutely prohibits fasting on Saturdays.

6) He claims that 2.5% zakât is not due on money obtained from commerce, ie. the main activity whereby money circulates among Muslims.

7) He claims that among the innovations in religion is the Prophet’s grave in Madinah.

8) He claims that whoever travels intending to visit the grave of the Prophet or to ask for his intercession is a misguided innovator.

9) In many of his books he calls for the demolition and removal of the Prophet’s grave.

10) He states: “I have found no evidence for the Prophet’s  hearing the salutation of those who greet him at his grave.” These are among his greater enormities and bear the unmistakable signature of innovation and deviation.

11) He advocates in his ‘Salât al-Nabî’ the formula “Peace and blessings upon the Prophet” instead of “…upon you, O Prophet” in the tash ahhud in contradiction of the Four Orthodox Schools of Jurisprudence. The Prophet  himself instructed Muslims to pray exactly as he prayed saying: “Peace and blessings upon you, O Prophet” without telling them to change it after his death. Furthermore the major Companions (whose Sunnah or precedent we are ordered to emulate together with that of the Prophet ), such as Abû Bakr and ‘Umar, did not teach the Companions and Successors otherwise!

12) He expresses hatred for those who read Imâm al-Busîrî’s masterpiece, Qasîdat al-Burdah, and calls them cretins (mahabil), in other words, millions of Muslims past and present, including the likes of Imâms Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalânî, al-Sakhâwî, and al-Suyûtî who all included it as required reading in the Islamic curriculum.

13) He published so called ‘corrected’ editions of the two Sahîhs of al Bukhârî and Muslim, which he deceitfully called ‘Abridgments’ (mukhtasar) in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks.

14) He published newly-styled editions of the Four Sunan, al-Bukhârî’s al-Adab al-Mufrad, al-Mundhirî’s al-Targhîb wa al-Tarhîb, and al-Suyûtî’s al-Jâmi` al-Saghîr, each of which he split into two works, respectively prefixed Sahîh and Daîf, in violation of the integrity of these motherbooks.

15) He suggests that al-Bukh ârî is a disbeliever for interpreting the Divine Face as dominion or sovereignty (mulk) in the verse “Everything will perish save His countenance” (28:88) in the book of Tafsîr in his Sahîh: “ ‘Except His countenance’ means ‘Except His Sovereignty’, and it is also said: ‘Except whatever was done for the sake of His countenance’.” Albânî blurts out: “No true believer would say such a thing.”

16) He fabricated a physical position to Allah, namely above the ‘Arsh (Throne), which he named al-makân al-‘adamî – ‘The non-existent place’.

17) In imitation of the Mu‘tazilah, he declared tawassul (seeking means) as prohibited acts in Islam (harâm) tantamount to idolatry (shirk) in open denial of the numerous sound and explicit narrations to that effect, such as al Bukhârî’s narration of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) from Ibn `Umar: “Truly the sun shall draw so near on the Day of Resurrection that sweat shall reach to the mid-ear, whereupon they shall ask help from Âdam , then from Mûsâ , and thereafter from Muhammad  who will intercede and that day Allah shall raise him to an Exalted Station, so that all those who are standing [including the unbelievers] shall glorify him (yahmaduhu ahl ul-jam`i kulluhum).”

19) Like the rest of the Wahhâbî innovators he declares the Ahl us Sunnah, namely the Ash ‘arîs, Ma‘tûrîdîs, Atharis and Sûfiyâ’ to be outside the pale of Islam, although Allah and His Prophet praised them! Upon revelation of the verse “Allah shall bring a people whom He loves and who love Him” (5:54), the Prophet  pointed to Abû Mûsâ al-Ash ‘arî (radhiyallahu anhu) and said: “They are that man’s People.” Al-Qush ayrî, Ibn ‘Asâkir, al-Bayhaqî, Ibn al-Subkî, and others said that the followers of Abû al Hasan al-Ash‘arî (rahimahullah) i.e. Ash‘aris who were mostly Sûfîs – are included among Abû Mûsâ al-Ash ‘arî’s (radhiyallahu anhu’s) people.

As for the Ma‘turîdîs, they are referred to in the narration of the Prophet from Bishr al-Khath‘amî or al-Ghanâwî (sahîh) chain according to al-Hâkim, al-Dhahabî, al-Suyûtî, and alamî with a sound: “Truly you shall conquer Constantinople and truly what a wonderful leader will her leader be [Sultân Muhammad Fâtih ], and truly what a wonderful army will that army be!” Both the leader and his army were classic Hanafî Ma‘tûrîdîs and it is known that Sultân Muhammad Fâtih loved and respected the Sûfiyâ’. Moreover, enmity against the Ash‘arîs, Ma‘tûrîdîs, and Sûfiyâ’, is nifâq (hypocrisy) of the highest order and manifest enmity against the Ummah of Islam as most of the ‘Ulamâ’ of Islam are thus described.

20) He issued the fatwâ that Muslims should exit Palestine en masse leaving it to the Jews as, he reasoned, it is part the Abode of War (dâr al-harb). This fallacious reasoning seems to bear the hallmark of complicity as displayed all too often by the Wahhabî traitors.

21) He prohibits performing more than 11 raka‘ât (cycles) in Tarâwîh prayers in blatant rejection of the Prophet’s explicit command to follow his Sunnah as well as the precedent of the rightly-guided Khalîfs after him.

22) He prohibits retreat (i`tikaf) in any but the Three Masjids.

23) He considers it an innovation to visit relatives, neighbors, or friends on the day of E‘Îd and prohibits it.

24) He considers it an innovation to pray four raka‘ât between the two adh âns of Jumu‘ah and before Salâh, although it is authentically narrated that “…the Prophet prayed four raka‘ât before Jumu‘ah and four raka‘ât after it.”

25) He gives free rein to his propensity to insult and vilify the ‘Ulamâ’ of the past as well as his contemporaries. As a result it is difficult to wade through his writings without being affected by the nefarious spirit that permeates them. For example, he considers previous editors and commentators of al-Bukh ârî’s al-Adab al-Mufrad (Book of Manners) ‘sinful’, ‘unbearably ignorant’, and even ‘liars’ and ‘thieves’. Such examples actually fill a book compiled by Shaykh Hasan ‘Alî al-Saqqâf entitled Qamûs Shatâ’im al-Albânî wa Alfâzihî al-Munkara al-Latî Yatluquhâ `alâ `Ulamâ’ al-Ummah (‘Dictionary of al-Albânî’s Insults and the Heinous Words He Uses Against the Scholars of the Muslim Community’). Al-Qurtubî said: “One of the knowers of Allah has said: A certain group that has not yet come up in our time but shall show up at the end of time, will curse the scholars and insult the jurists.”

26) He compares Hanafî fiqh to the Gospel, ie. corrupt and unreliable.

27) He calls people to emulate him rather than the Imâms and founders of the Four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence.

28) He derides the fuqahâ‘ of the Ummah for accepting – in their overwhelming majority – the hadîth of Mu‘âdh ibn Jabal on ijtihâd as authentic then rejects the definition of knowledge (‘ilm) in Islam as pertaining to fiqh claiming that it pertains to hadîth only. This despite the fact that the ‘Ulamâ of the Ummah have explicitly stated that a hadîth master without fiqh is a misguided innovator!

29) He revived Ibn Hazm’s anti-Madhhabî claim that differences can never be a mercy in any case but are always a curse on the basis of the verse “If it had been from other than Allah they would have found therein much discrepancy.” (4:82). Imâm al-Nawawî long since refuted this view in his commentary on Sahîh Muslim where he said: “…no-one says this, except an ignoramus or one who affects ignorance.” Similarly, al-Munawî said in Fayd al-Qadîr: “This is a contrivance that showed up on the part of some of those who have a sickness in their heart.”

30) He perpetuates the false claim first made by Munir Agha the founder of the Egyptian Salafiyyah Press, that Imâm Abû Muhammad al Juwaynî – the father of Imâm al-Haramayn – “repented” from Ash‘arî doctrine and supposedly authored a tract titled Risâlah fi Ithbât al Istiwâ’ wa al-Fawqiyyah (‘Epistle on the Assertion of ‘Establishment’ and ‘Aboveness’).

This spurious attribution continues to be promoted without verification – for obvious reasons – by the Wahhabîs who adduce it to forward the claim that al-Juwaynî embraced anthropomorphist concepts. The Risâlah in question is not mentioned in any of the bibliographical and biographical sources nor does al-Dhahabî cite it in his encyclopedia of anthropomorphist views entitled ‘al-‘Uluw’. More conclusively, it is written in modern argumentative style and reflects typically contemporary anthropomorphist obsessions.

The most important thing for a person who seeks truth is to remain objective and be skeptical of so-called ‘given truths’ – especially ideas that are in fashion in his/her day and age. In every age and time, there were always ideas that were fashionable, accepted as given, and taken for granted that they were true – but later rejected as false – even laughed at.

The best approach for the rational mind, is to withdraw oneself from the society and time period one inhabits and look at the ideas around oneself for what they are. Many thinkers and philosophers have done this and have written great books whose content mostly remains timeless. The reason for this, is that they have successfully removed themselves from their times and cultures and used their minds to assess the ideas based purely on their evidence and merit, and come to conclusions of truth, no matter how unpopular or odd they seem to their society at the time.

However, the one thing I’ve noticed, is that most people claim to be skeptical only to ideas they don’t like, or which is not in line with the accepted culture or fashion of their times. Many such people even claim that they are ‘rational’ and want people to ‘think for themselves’, but really they just want people to ‘think’ their way into conformity with popular trends and the dominant fashions.

I’ve always urged Muslims to be skeptical, even of their own beliefs, in order that they can reach certainty and depart from blindly following their parents religion and culture. But unfortunately there is another culture that influences some Muslims and is blindly followed by many of them due to their inability to detach themselves from their society and time and look at the world from a rational and detached perspective – the culture of Western Civilisation.

It is taken as ‘accepted’ in this day and age that religion is a retrograde force, and that only Secularism or Liberalism can bring progress. It is also accepted ‘wisdom’ that the development and technological progression of the West is due to their democratic systems of ruling, and their liberal secular values. The concept of ‘democracy’, ‘nationalism’, ‘feminism’, ‘secularism’ and [the Liberal conception of] ‘human rights’ is taken as given ‘truths’ to the degree that they have attained the level of an unquestioned religious dogma. Most people don’t know how to philosophically justify these ideas, or how they came about – all that people know is, ‘it’s the MODERN way to do things’.

However, just like the proverbial big elephant in the room that everyone is ignoring, these ideas lack any rational justification or intellectual basis. For example, Democracy is impossible, people will always be ruled by one leader or small group of leaders – usually the elites of their society. This was something both Plato, and the classical Muslim philosopher Al Farabi realised and wrote about.

Nationalism cannot be justified, as there is no clear way to delineate one nation from another [is it common language? Then is USA, Australia and South Africa all one nation?]. Secondly, why should humans be separated and discriminated into categories that should hold no moral difference or division??

Feminism cannot be rationally justified either, as basing rights on gender is either arbitrary and unholistic at best, or elitist and sectarian at worst (if men are not also considered equally in the equation). If men and women should be exactly equal in everything, as Feminism claims, then why not egalitarianism instead of feminism??

Secularism cannot be rationally justified, because in essence it posits the absurd notion that man’s purpose in life should be separate from man’s affairs in life. Secularism then results in a materialistic re-interpretation of man’s purpose of life, and the imposition of this purpose in place of a former non-materialistic purpose – with no conclusive reason why one is superior to another. Secularism then naturally ends up being non-neutral to this central question of human purpose, while fooling the people as pretending to be neutral!

‘Human rights’ [as understood by Liberalism] are arbitrary, prone to change depending on society’s current tastes at any given point in time, and lacks any rational justification for where rights even come from in the first place. The irony of Liberalism is, while pretending to be materialistic, it borrowed a lot of its rights from Christianity and theology (which is where the term ‘God given rights’ comes from) then quietly divorced from it later on when it wanted to claim ‘universality’ to the world. Consequently, ‘rights’ can’t be justified. For example, if humans have rights merely for being human, then why are criminals denied the ‘right to freedom’ when they are put in jails?? Surely they are still human, and therefore deserving of their full ‘human rights’? Apparently not.

However, the Modernist ‘Muslims’ doesn’t question these Western imports. They are perfectly happy to be skeptical against all Islamic laws, beliefs and traditions, but never to be skeptical on the Western ideas they blindly follow and adore. Modernists can only defend these borrowed Western ideas with emotional arguments, usually either brushing off the criticism as ‘just wrong’ or ‘out of kilter’ or claim the criticism is just ‘a strawman’ of their beliefs – without providing any evidence to show why its a strawman. I’ve yet to hear a rational argument from a modernist other than merely playing down criticism of Western ideas as merely ‘the ramblings of Islamist fundamentalism’ – which is the equivalent of the dismissive saying ‘you are just haters’.

This reveals something very interesting about the Modernist mindset. As the saying goes ‘you can’t reason someone out of something they weren’t reasoned into’, and the Modernist ‘Muslim’s’ blind faith in Western ideas is just that, an irrational dogma they’ve adopted blindly. But this leads us to the question ‘what made them believe these ideas in the first place??, why are they so alluring??’. The answer is quite simple, ‘might makes right’. The West, though declining, still retains a degree of cultural, technological, economic and military superiority over the Muslim world. The Muslim world, for reasons of social and historical circumstances is currently in a ignorant and declined state – it’s simply human nature for the weak to look up to the strong, just like the Barbarian tribes of europe looked up to Roman culture before and adopted their habits and language.

The are two main problems with this modernist logic. They have made two faulty assumptions, and this leads them to their error.

The first assumption is that Muslim decline is due to the ‘traditional Muslim understanding of Islam. This is easily refuted when we consider that during the first 500 years of ‘traditional Islam’ Muslims were technologically, militarily and economically the most advanced in the world – innovating many new technologies and expanding the boundaries of human knowledge. The fact that Muslims believed in hudud punishments, the traditional family, or wearing turbans and having beards didn’t limit their cultural advancement in the slightest. This demonstrates that the spirit of technological progress and knowledge development has NOTHING to do with the ‘traditional’ Islamic law system, and everything to do with the Muslim state of mind. Consequently, the main problem of the Muslim world is not getting rid of ‘medieval laws’ but to rediscover of the same spirit and state of mind that motivated our ancestors to advance in all spheres of life. The Islamic political system is not limited to only being implemented using medieval technology, but can be implemented using modern technology! Systems don’t change, technology changes. Democracy is 1000 years older than Islam, yet no one believes that implementing it will send people back to the age of wearing togas and worshipping Zeus! Political systems are timeless, because they merely describe a set of relationships between humans, not a technological tool or piece of equipment.

The second biggest assumption made by modernists, is that religion is a retrograde force, and that Western advancement , political stability and economic success is the result of leaving religion and implementation of democracy, liberalism, secularism and nationalism. However history begs to differ.

Christianity was never the reason for the European dark ages, but rather the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of barbarian tribes is the most glaringly obvious reason. Historians are generally agreed that the last great ancient, or classical period philosopher before the fall into the dark ages was the Christian thinker St Augustine! However, since Christianity can only exist in the minds of humans, if the humans carrying it are ignorant, shallow thinkers, then their understanding and practice of Christianity will also be ignorant and shallow. To believe the dark ages was the cause of the Catholic clergy’s behaviour during this period is to confuse the symptom with the problem.

For most of the last 500 years, technological advancement in the West started, and has mostly occurred, under highly religious non-democratic European monarchies and empires. The Liberal Democratic Europe we see today mostly emerged only in the last century! [1900-1999]. The vast majority of pioneering Western scientists were not Atheists, nor did they live under Secularism, but rather they were devout Catholics and even clergy (e.g. Roger Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Copernicus, Descartes, Pascal, Boyle and even the recent George Lemaitre, discoverer of the ‘big bang theory’…) or protestant Church (e.g. Newton) – and much scientific literature and almost ALL institutes of higher education and research were under patronage by the Catholic [and later Anglican] Church!

Economic success in the West started with colonialism (and continued with neo-colonialism to this day)- but now is seriously declining COINCIDENTALLY with the rise of countries powerful enough to be outside Western control (e.g. india, china, Iran, brazil etc).

As for political stability, it is mostly due to wealth – but even then people should check their history. Many Liberal and Secular countries today are not the result of an unbroken continued implementation of Liberalism, but rather many currently Liberal countries are the results of a second attempt to re-impose Liberalism after a previous attempt failed, which led to civil wars and the collapse into fascist or autocratic regimes (e.g. Spain, France, Portugal, Italy, Germany, Mexico, Japan, Greece etc…over the last 150 years). And the future looks like Liberalism is collapsing again in a number of Western countries, with fascism rising again ‘coincidentally’ as these same countries get poorer [recent example, Greece, Ukraine!].

What took the West out of the Dark Ages, was the change induced by their interaction with the medieval Islamic civilisation which developed a spirit and state of mind that led to the beginning of technological development and the advancement of human knowledge LONG before Liberalism, Secularism, Nationalism were invented [and Democracy re-implemented since Ancient Greek times]. These ideas did not begin the Western intellectual renaissance, but were rather the RECENT PRODUCTS of it [along with Communism and Fascism]. Oh how human memory is short to believe those ideas have existed since the beginning of Western development! If you could take a time machine and go back 100 years, you’d see a europe mostly NOT LIBERAL and 150 years back mostly not secular. Technically, UK is still not a Secular country! The head of state is the head of the national Church – a relic of the not-so-distant past).

In the end, Western development came from a state of mind and spirit, not from an ideology or set of ideas (just look at the modern example of China, a country fast outpacing USA in inventions and industry, despite being not Liberal and not Democratic!).

In contrast, the Arabs developed and advanced not when they removed religion from their life’s affairs (like the pagan Quraysh had been doing for centuries) but change only happened after they CONNECTED religion with their life’s affairs – Islam. It was only then that the Arabs then rose at an intellectually and technologically alarming rate, eventually surpassing all the empires around them in achievements.

What changed the Arabs was not contact with another civilisation, but rather the introduction of Islam – which spread beyond the Arabs, creating a new ‘nation’ (the Muslim Ummah) and assimilation different races and cultures into itself. The ideal that spurred the early Muslims to excel in civilisation, and to expand human knowledge and condition, was the ideal of ihsan – the attainment of the perfection of the Worship of Allah Almighty. Unlike the secular understanding of this in the current Muslim dark age, the classical understanding of Ihsan was the perfection not just of praying, and dhikr, nor just morals and conduct, but the perfection of wisdom, knowledge of God’s creation [the universe] and the worship of him through the highest degree of philanthropy to our fellow human beings – creating hospitals, medicines, mental therapies, sewage systems, health care and technologies that provide ease. The obligation to prayer alone, viewed today as a purely private spiritual affair, created in the medieval Islamic world, the material and knowledge advancements in city planning, street lighting, acoustics, astronomy, navigation, water provision to cities, even domestic plumbing [yes, all that from just the Islamic obligation of the Salah!].

The task of the Muslim today, is not to change Islam in the hope of imitating the West’s current intellectual follies, but rather to recapture the state of mind and spirit that made our medieval ancestors excel in civilisation.

And to our Modernist friends, with the decline of the West, and the social, economic and political problems rising in its societies, perhaps we should ask them this searching question ‘why do you want to imitate the most recent ideas produced by a declining civilisation?’

Zakat means purification, growth and abundance. Allah the exalted says “Take Sadaqah (alms) from their wealth in order to purify them and sanctify them with it, and invoke Allah for them.” In the terminology of Shari’ah, it is a specified amount of wealth given to the poor and needy, according to the instructions of Allah, by making them owner of this amount.

Ruling of Zakat

The payment of Zakat is obligatory. The verses of the Holy Qur’an and the sayings of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) confirm its obligatory nature. Whoever denies the obligation of Zakat is a disbeliever.

When was Zakat made obligatory?
The Zakat had been made obligatory in the initial period of Islam in Makkah, as the eminent commentator of Qur’an, Ibne Katheer (rahimahullah) has deduced from the verse of Surah al-Muzammil, that reads: “And perform the prayer and pay the alms (Zakat),” because it is among the Makkan chapters (surahs) of the Qur’an, and belongs to the initial period of revelation. However, it is known from prophetic traditions that in the initial period of Islam no specific Nisab or amount was set. But a major portion of whatever remained in possession of a Muslim after fulfilling his needs was spent in the cause of Allah. The specification of Nisab and the determination of amount of Zakat were done after emigration to Madinah.

Benefits of Zakat

Zakat is a form of worship, it is an order from Allah. The goal of giving Zakat is to follow Allah’s order, whether or not we obtain any (worldly) gain or benefit by paying it. That is the real objective of Zakat. However, it is a blessing from Allah that whoever pays Zakat is also benefited from its worldly advantages. Among these advantages is that the payment of Zakat results in growth, increment and purification of the remaining wealth. Allah says in the Qur’an “Allah destroys riba and nourishes charities” (al-Baqarah: 276).

In a prophetic tradition it was narrated that Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: When a slave of Allah pays Zakat, the Angels of Allah pray for him in these words: “O Allah! Grant abundance to him who spends (in Your cause) and destroy one who does not spend and restricts his wealth to himself.”

The prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Charity does not in any way decreases the wealth.”

Upon whom is Zakat obligatory?

Zakat is obligatory upon every Muslim who is in sound state of mind, reaches the age of puberty and has in his possession a certain amount of wealth that attracts the obligation of Zakat (called Nisab), this amount of Nisab should exceed his basic needs and be free from debt and remain in his possession for a complete lunar year.

Nisab for Zakat (minimum amount of net or wealth that warrants the obligation of Zakat):

The owner of Nisab is one who possesses 52.5 Tola of silver (612.36 grams) or 7.5 Tola of gold (87.48 grams) or its equivalent value in the form of cash, trade articles or jewellery that remain in his possession for one complete lunar year.

However, there is a difference of opinion amongst scholars over exemption of women’s personal jewellery that is worn regularly from Zakat. But due to the gravity of warnings against not paying Zakat in the Qur’anic verses and prophetic traditions, Zakat should also be paid on such jewellery (to remain on the safer side).

The amount of Zakat to be paid

On the above mentioned Nisab, Zakat must be paid at the rate of 2.5%.

What is included in the items of trade??

It includes all the items and commodities owned for the purpose of selling. Thus, those who purchase plot as an investment and intend (from the time of purchase itself) to benefit from the profit of its sale, whenever handsome prices are offered for it, then Zakat would be payable on the value of such plot also.

However, if someone purchases a plot without any fixed intention, i.e., he may build a house on it, rent it, or sell it, depending on the circumstances then Zakat is not payable on the value of such plot.

Which day’s Market value is acceptable?

For the payment of Zakat, valuation shall be based on the current market prices of the day in which you are calculating your Zakat.

Passing a complete year on every single rupee is not necessary:

Passing a complete year over the assets which are subjected to Zakat does not mean that a complete year should pass on every single rupee. For example last year in Ramadan you had 5 lakhs of rupees and after passing a complete lunar year over it you had paid its Zakat, now the fluctuation of amount during the course of this year until its end in Ramadan would not be considerable as the subject matter of Zakat, now you should see how much amount you have in this Ramadan at the end of the year. For instance, if you have six lakhs of rupees, at the end of the year in Ramadan, which exceeds your basic needs, than pay Zakat on this amount at the rate of 2.5%.

Who are entitled to receive Zakat?

In Surah Taubah, verse no. 60, Allah, the exalted, has mentioned 8 categories of people who are entitled to receive Zakat:

1. A poor person who has meagre amount of wealth, which does not reach to the level of Nisab

2. A needy person, who has no wealth

3. A person who has been assigned the job of collecting Zakat

4. Those whose hearts are to be reconciled

5. A slave whose freedom is desired

6. The one who is burdened with debt, and does not have money free from the debt that reaches the level of Nisab

7. The one who strives in the way of Allah

8. A wayfarer who has run out of resources

Note: Even though the word “Sadaqa” has been used in this verse, which implies on charity, but in the light of other verses and prophetic traditions, the commentators are of the view that Sadaqa stands here for Zakat (which is obligatory) not for charity (which is optional).

People who are not entitled to receive Zakat:

1. A person having enough wealth which is in excess of his basic needs and reaches the level of Nisab.

5. Husband neither can give Zakat to his wife nor can the wife give Zakat to her husband.

Note: Paying Zakat to brother, sister, nephew, niece, maternal nephew, maternal niece, paternal uncle, paternal aunt, maternal aunt, maternal uncle, mother in law, father in law, son in law, provided they are needy, has two fold reward, one of paying Zakat and other of strengthening the ties of relations. Zakat may also be given to them in form of a gift or present.

Warning on not giving Zakat

Allah the Exalted has given a stern warning to those who do not pay Zakat on their wealth. As He says in Surah al Taubah: Verse No. 34), “And those who hoard up gold and silver, and spend it not in the Way of Allah, announce unto them a painful torment.” And then in next verse the details of this painful torment has been described:

“On the Day when that (Al-Kanz: money, gold and silver, etc., the Zakat of which has not been paid) will be heated in the Fire of Hell and with it will be branded their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, (and it will be said unto them):-“This is the treasure which you hoarded for yourselves. Now taste of what you used to hoard.” (al-Taubah:35).

May Allah save us all from this horrible end.

Some rulings concerning Zakat

– It is not mandatory to inform the recipient of Zakat that (the paid amount) belongs to Zakat, rather it can be given to a poor child as an Eid gift or with any other title.

– It is permissible to give Zakat to poor students pursuing education in Islamic Schools (Madarsas)

– If a wife has enough wealth that reaches the level of Nisab, then Zakat is obligatory on her as well. However, if the husband pays Zakat on behalf of his wife from his wealth, then Zakat would be acceptable.

Zakat on gold or silver jewellery

Omar Farooq, Abdullah Bin Mas’ud, Abdullah Bin Abbas, Abdullah Bin Amr Bin Al-A’as (radhiyallahu anhum), similarly famous and renowned Tabi’een, Saeed Bin Jubair, Ata’a, Mujahid, Ibn Sirin, Imam Zohari, Imam Sauri, Imam Auzaie and the great Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahumullah) are well convinced being Zakat obligatory on usable gold or silver jewellery, whether ornaments be equal to the minimum amount of gold liable to Zakat or more and one full year passed over it, the following several evidences are being presented in this context:

(1) The general command of the holy Qur’an and Sunnah in which being Zakat obligatory on gold or silver without any condition (whether for use or non-use) is mentioned and in these holy verses and Ahadith, harsh and severe warnings for negligence in non-payment of Zakat, are mentioned. This generality is obviously found in numerous Verses and Ahadith. Due to brevity, I confine this subject to one verse and one Hadith only:

And those who hoard gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah – give them tidings of a painful punishment. The Day when it will be heated in the fire of Hell and seared therewith will be their foreheads, their flanks, and their backs, (it will be said), “This is what you hoarded for yourselves, so taste what you used to hoard.” (35) (Tauba 34 & 35). The Messenger of Allah said that the wealth whose Zakat is paid, does not enter within the category of (متزنك stored) (Abu Daud, Musnad Ahmad). Thus, the gold and silver whose Zakat is not being paid, so, on the day of resurrection, that gold and silver will be heated in the fire of hell, and then their foreheads, flanks and backs will be seared— May Allah, the Exalted, help us to pay Zakat of all wealth, gold and silver and save all of us from painful torment! Aameen.

Abu Hurairah (radhiyallahu anhu) reported Allah’s Messenger (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) as saying: If any owner of gold or silver does not pay what is due on him, when the Day of Resurrection would come, plates of fire would be beaten out for him; these would then be heated in the fire of Hell and his sides, his forehead and his back would be cauterized with them. Whenever these cool down, (the process is) repeated during a day the extent of which would be fifty thousand years, until judgment is pronounced among servants, and he sees whether his path is to take him to Paradise or to Hell.

In the above mentioned Verse and Hadith, a painful punishment is reported in general, due to non-payment of zakat on gold or silver, whether they are ornaments for use or gold and silver for trading. It is therefore, in the holy Qur’an, no exclusion or exemption from Zakat of usable ornaments is mentioned at any occasion.

(2) Abdullah bin ‘Umar (radhiyallahu anhu) reported: that A woman came to the Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and she was accompanied by her daughter who wore two heavy gold bangles in her hands. He said to her: Do you pay zakat on them? She said: No. He then said: Are you pleased that Allah may put two bangles of fire on your hands?? Thereupon she took them off and placed them before the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) saying: They are for Allah and His Apostle. (Sunan Abi Da’ud, Chapter: On the Meaning of Kanz (Treasure) and Zakat on Jewellery, Musnad Ahmad – Tirmidhi – Darqutni) Imam Nawavi, the explainer of Muslim and Naseruddin Albani has authenticated this Hadith.

(3) Ayesha (radhiyallahu anha), wife of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallan) said that the Apostle of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) entered upon me and saw two silver rings in my hand. He asked what this, Aisha (radhiyallahu anha) said I have made two ornaments myself for you, Messenger of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam). He asked do you pay zakat on them. I said no or I said Whatever Allah willed. He said this is sufficient for you (to take you) to the Hell fire (Sunan Abi Dawud 1/244 & Darqutni).

A group of Muhaddiththin has authenticated this Hadith. Imam Khattabi has mentioned it in (Ma’alimussunan 3/176) explaining that the most likely this ring alone does not complete the course of Zakat, this clearly means that if these rings are included in other ornaments and completed the course, then their Zakat must be paid. The same justification is stated by Imam Sufiyan Thawri (rahimahullah).

(4) Asma’a Bint Yazid (radhiyallahu anha) said: I and my aunt came to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and we had worn the bracelets of gold. He said to us: “Do you pay their Zakat? “We said: No. He, said, “Aren’t you afraid that Allah will wear you the bracelets of fire tomorrow on the Day of resurrection? (Due to non-payment of their Zakat). So, you have to pay their zakat (Musnad Ahmad). A group of Muhaddithin has authenticated this Hadith.

Being Zakat obligatory on jewellery is mentioned in number of Ahadith. We mentioned here only three Ahadith avoiding prolongation.

The second school of thought of Muslim Ummah who is of the view that Zakat is not obligatory on usable ornaments, they generally present two arguments:

1- Rational Argument: Allah Almighty made Zakat obligatory on the wealth that may be augmented and grown, whereas there is no growth in the jewellery of gold and silver— Whatever the case may be, in fact there is a growth in the ornaments too, thus by the increase in the value of gold and silver, the value of ornaments are also increased. Nowadays, the profit margin is found in gold more than other trade deals.

2- Few Ahadith and Companions’ quotations: They are all denied and weak Hadiths, as Sheikh Naseruddin Albani has written in his book named with evidences and arguments.

The majority of Indian Subcontinent’s scholars have written that if the usable jewellery reaches the course (minimum amount for obligation of zakat), then it is obligatory to pay zakat. In the light of Qur’an and Sunnah, the same opinion is of the former Mufti of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Sheikh Abdul Aziz Bin Baaz “that Zakat is obligatory on usable ornaments.”

Rule of thumb

On the subject under discussion, the Muslim Ummah is divided into two schools of thoughts from long time. Every school of thought has resorted to the prophetic Ahadith for support of its stance. But no one can deny the fact that wherever in the holy Qur’an, severe warnings are indicated on non-payment of zakat on gold and silver, at none of occasions/places, any difference between usable and trading gold is reported. Moreover, there is no Hadith which cannot be argued or criticized, out of stock of Ahadith that exclude usable jewellery from zakat. To the contrary, some of authentic Hadith do clearly guide being zakat obligatory on usable jewellery. Sheikh Naseruddin Albani has also considered some of these Ahadith as authentic. Even though, if there is no Hadith for being zakat obligatory on usable ornaments, then in the light of general ruling of the Holy Qur’an, we should pay zakat on every kinds of gold and silver, whether usable or not, so that, we could rescue ourselves from painful torment and shame and humiliation on the day of resurrection. Moreover, in declaring zakat obligatory on usable ornaments, there is benefit for poor, orphans and widows, so that the wealth would not confined in few houses/families, but by extending this fund as help, we will do our best to make our society better.

Precaution

Those Ahadith mentioned above in that, the prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) has also obligated zakat on usable ornaments, a group of Mohaddesin is agreed upon being these Ahadith as authentic, however some Muhaddiththin has decided that there is a weakness in their narration source. But the safe side is that we should pay the zakat for usable ornaments, so, we could save ourselves from stricter threats and warnings mentioned in the holy Qur’an and Sunnah for non-payment of zakat. Moreover, along with purification, the growth and augmentation could be possible in our wealth only on the condition that we will completely pay zakat of our wealth. Because, there is no promise of purification and growth in the wealth until full zakat is paid. Hence, some of companions and Tabi’een who do not see zakat in usable jewellery and we well know after being acquaint with their life conditions that they against their needs, had been considering success of their world and hereafter in fulfilling of other’s needs, and they had been spending a great part of their wealth for Allah’s sake. The historical books are filled with such events and stories. At such a time when a largest segment of the Muslim Ummah is not ready to pay Zakat, much less they will help their poor brethren with charities and other material aids. It is therefore, more precaution is in payment of zakat for usable jewellery, so that we can save ourselves by extending material assistance to poor, orphans and widows not only from torment on Day of Resurrection, but also we should be entitled of great reward.

Some Clarifications 

* If jewellery are not for use, but they are kept to utilize in case of a trouble in future (for example marriage of daughter) and more than a year has passed over them and were not used, then in this event, all scholars are agreed upon being zakat obligatory on these jewelleries, e.g. the second school of thought is also agreed upon it. 

* Upon payment of jewellery zakat, the sale value of old gold will be taken into consideration. For instance, the gold which is possessed by you, if you sell it in the market, then, what would be the value of that, the same value will be taken into consideration upon payment of zakat.

* There is consensus among Muslim Ummah on not being zakat obligatory on diamond, because Islamic Shari’ah has counted it as valuable stones. However, if they are kept for trading, then if reach the course of zakat, so their zakat will be obligatory. 

* If someone possesses cash or bank balance beside gold and silver, thus he has to pay their zakat, however there are two basic conditions for them: 

* They should be either equal to the course or more 

* One year has already passed over them.

‘Ushr’ (Tithe) On Agricultural Produce

One of the majestic favours of the Creator of the Universe is the creation of earth, in which numerous kinds of grains, fruits, flowers, vegetables, and plants grow by Allah’s order, without which the survival of man is impossible. It is mercy and benevolence of Allah that He made this earth for man’s consumption, and stored a huge stock of nutriment in it for all humans until the Day of Judgment.
Allah made the soil productive, and for the growth and development of produce, He provided with water in abundance by sending it down from the clouds and making the streams flow from the mountains and placing water reservoirs within earth. Along with provision of air, he made light and heat available to enable humans, Jinns and other creatures to make the best use of land produce and spend their lives.

Undoubtedly, it is the Creator of the universe Who has set such a mechanism of earth’s productivity. Allah, the Exalted, says in the Holy Qur’an: “Have you seen that (seed) which you sow? Is it you who makes it grow, or are We the grower?” (al-Waaqi’ah: 63), it means that your job is only to sow the seed and work hard (in order to grow it). Was it within your reach to develop it until it turns into a
shoot or transform it into a tree or plant and make it produce grains and fruits for your benefit?? Is there anyone besides Allah who can develop this seed which you sowed to this stage??

No doubt each and every grain of earth’s produce is a great blessing of Allah, and the actual Creator is Allah, the Exalted. Man is incapable of growing even a straw without the immense favours of Allah like making the soil productive and making water, air, heat, cold and light available. Everyone should be thankful to Allah for this majestic blessing that He facilitated the best of the foods and nutriments for us from the earth. The Islamic Shari’ah has taught the way to express thanks (to Allah) by paying one-tenth’ or one-twentieth out of the produce of land as Zakat to fulfil the needs of the poor and the needy.

Regarding Zakat on produce of land Allah says in the Holy Qur’an: “And it is He Who produces gardens trellised and untrellised, and date-palms, and crops of different shape and taste (its fruits and its seeds) and olives, and pomegranates, similar (in kind) and different (in taste). Eat of their fruit when they ripen, but pay the due thereof on the day of its harvest, and waste not by extravagance. Verily, He likes not Al-Musrifun (those who waste by extravagance),” (al-Anaam: 141)

Similarly, Allah the Exalted says: “O you who believe! Spend of the good things which you have (legally) earned, and of that which We have produced from the earth for you, and do not aim at that which is bad to spend from it, (though) you would not accept it save if you close your eyes and tolerate therein. And know that Allah is Rich (Free of all wants), and Worthy of all praise.” (al-Baqarah: 267)

The first and the foremost commentator of the Holy Qur’an, The Prophet of Allah (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “A tenth is payable on what is watered by rivers, or rains, and a twentieth on what is watered by camels”. (Muslim, Musnad Ahmad, Nasai and Abu Dawood)

The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said: “On a land irrigated by rain water or by natural water channels or if the land is wet due to a nearby water channel, half of an Ushr (i.e. one twentieth) is compulsory as Zakat on the yield of the land. (Bukhari, Tirmidhi, Nasai, Abu Dawood and Ibne Majah)

In the light of the Qur’anic verses and Prophetic Traditions (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), Muslim scholars agreed that it is obligatory to pay one-tenth’ or one-twentieth out of the produce as Zakat on the yield of the land, however, there is a difference amongst them in its details. (Badai’us Sanai’)

In his book al-Mughni, Sheikh Ibne Qudamah mentions that there is no difference of opinion in the Ummah concerning the obligatory nature of Zakat on the produce of land.

What is Ushr??

Ushr means one-tenth’. But as per the explanation of Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) regarding Zakat on the yield of land it is divided into two categories:

1- If the land is irrigated by the water of rain, or river, or canal available free of cost then one-tenth’ out of the produce of land would be obligatory to pay as Zakat of agricultural produce.

2- If the land is irrigated by tube well or any other similar means then one-twentieth out of the produce of land would be obligatory to pay.

To sum up, on the produce of land irrigated by the water that is available free of charge, only one-tenth’ of the produce would be payable otherwise, one-twentieth of the produce would be given. If the land was irrigated by both rain water and water from tube well, then the means that had had a greater contribution in irrigation shall be taken into account (for calculation). The Zakat levied on both kinds of means is termed as Ushr by Islamic jurists.

Nisab for Ushr (minimum amount of produce that mandates the payment of ushr)

Due to the absence of any specification in the Qur’an or Hadith (regarding Ushr) no exact Nisab was set forth by Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah). Rather, it would be payable on every produce of land, regardless of quantity of produce. This means that there is no fixed Nisab in Ushr like Zakat, below which Ushr may be waived. According to Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah) Ushr, one-tenth’ or one-twentieth of the produce is also mandatory on fruits and vegetables. But with reference to the Hadeeth “Sadaqah is payable on less than five Wasaq” Imam Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad (rahimahumullah) and other jurists opined that if the produce is less than five Wasaq which is equal to 1 Quintal and 53 kg, no Ushr is obligatory. Meaning, if the produce of wheat is less than 1 Quintal and 53 kg then, Ushr will not be payable on it.

Difference between Ushr and Zakat

In case of Ushr, if the produce of land is obtained multiple times in a year, Ushr (one-tenth’ or one-twentieth) of each produce would be payable every time. For Zakat to be obligatory on gold, silver and money, it is necessary that such a wealth should exceed the basic needs and reach the level of Nisab and remain in possession for a whole year. However, all these conditions (for Zakat) are not a prerequisite for the payment of Ushr. On cash, gold and silver Zakat is payable only once a year, however on produce of land, which is reaped twice a year the Zakat will also be payable twice (a year).

After the payment of Ushr on produce of land, if the grains are stored for future, payment of Ushr would not be obligatory on them again. But, if these grains are sold, Zakat will be obligatory on the amount obtained from this sale, if the amount reaches to the level of Nisab, and remains in possession for a whole year. No Zakat is obligatory on agricultural lands regardless of their cost.

Ushr on the land given to the tenants on the basis of produce sharing

It is mandatory for every person to pay Zakat (one-tenth or one-twentieth) in accordance with the amount of produce obtained from his share. For example, if the landlord and tenant divided the land produce between them equally, both of them should pay one-tenth’ or one-twentieth out of what they received.

Ushr and the expenses of reaping

In case of Ushr of agricultural yield, one-tenth’ or onetwentieth out of the total produce will be paid, and the expenses of reaping, etc. should not be deducted from it. For example if the produce of wheat is one metric ton, out of which five Quintals were paid as the expense of reaping and ten Quintals were given as the price of threshing, Ushr would be payable on one metric ton of produce not on 85 Quintals, i.e. after deducting 15 Quintals from the total produce.

Some rulings 

* In case of Ushr on agricultural produce, whatever share is mandatory for payment on produce (say one Quintal wheat) can be paid in form cash, i.e. it is permissible to pay cash equivalent to amount of a Quintal of wheat rather than wheat itself. (Shami) 

* If a fruit tree like guava is planted within residential premises or some crop is grown at a small level around it, no Ushr (one-tenth’ or one-twentieth) of the produce would be payable on it. (Shami)

Lands in Subcontinent generally fall under the category on which Ushr of the produce should be paid to those who are entitled to receive it. Maulana Abdussamad Rahmani classified Indian lands into thirteen categories, Ushr being mandatory on ten of them (as per the rule) and other three falls under the category of land on which Ushr must be paid to those deserving it, to remain on the safer side. (Modern Jurisprudial Rulings, Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani)

Some scholars differ concerning Ushr on agricultural produce of Indian lands, but due to absence of any specification in the Qur’an and Hadeeth regarding Ushr, payment of one-tenth’ or one-twentieth of the produce should be done to those who are entitled to receive it, to be on the safer side.

Eight categories of people entitled to receive Ushr, they are also the recipient of Zakat

Allah mentioned eight people in Surah al-Taubah verse no: 60; who are entitled to receive Zakat:

1. A poor person who has meagre amount of wealth, which does not reach to the level of Nisab.

2. A needy person, who has no wealth.

3. A person who has been assigned the job of collecting Zakat.

4. Those whose hearts are to be reconciled.

5. A slave whose freedom is desired

6. The one who is burdened with debt, and does not have money free from the debt that reaches the level of Nisab

7. The one who strives in the way of Allah.

8. A wayfarer who has run out of resources.

Allah Demands From us ‘a Goodly Loan’!

Despite the fact that Allah is the Creator, the Owner and the Sustainer, has created us all including Jinns and Human Beings, he has asked us repeatedly in the Holy Qur’an, that we should pay Him qarazan hasana, a goodly loan. This is His absolute bounty and endowment that He has bequeathed us all the means to earn wealth and thereupon, He demands from us a loan!

In the Holy Qur’an, Allah has referred to this kind of loan twelve times, in six different verses. At every place the loan has been associated with the expression of hasana, the goodly and the fair loan. In these verses, Allah has described several forms of compensation for this kind of ‘goodly loan’ e.g. the best reward in this life, the best recompense in the world and in the Hereafter, a great reward in the Hereafter, pardoning of the sins and admittance into the Paradise.

The literal meaning of the Arabic word qard is ‘to cut’. In this context, such a loan would entail that a person cuts off some part of his wealth and spends it in the name of Allah who in turn promises its reparation several times more than the original sum. By helping out the destitute, no dearth is caused in a person’s wealth, rather the fortune apportioned for the poor and the needy is divinely returned
back to the individual with a manifold increase. This increase sometimes manifests itself through both the material and spiritual abundance within this lifetime and in the Hereafter, there would certainly be an overwhelming blessing in this loan which is hasana, the better, the beautiful, the good!

The six Qur’anic Verses about this kind of loan are as follows: 

Who is the one who would give Allah a good loan so that Allah multiplies it for him many times? Allah withholds and extends, and to Him you are to be returned. (Surah Al Baqara Verse 245) 

Behold! I shall be with you! If you are constant in prayer, and spend in charity, and believe in my apostles and aid them, and offer up unto Allah a goodly loan, I will surely efface your bad deeds and bring you into gardens through which running waters flow. (Surah Al Ma’ida Verse 12) 

Who is it that will offer up unto Allah a goodly loan, which he will amply repay? For such (as who do so) shall have a noble reward. (Surah Al Hadeed Verse 11) 

Verily as for the men and women who accept the truth as true as who offer up unto Allah a goodly loan, they will be amply repaid and shall have a noble reward (in the life to come). (Surah Al Hadeed Verse 18) 

If you offer unto Allah a goodly loan, He will amply repay you for it, and will forgive your sins: for Allah is ever Responsive to gratitude and is Forbearing. (Surah Al-Taghabun Verse 17) 

And spend in charity and thus lend unto Allah a goodly loan: for whatever good deed you may offer up in your own behalf, you shall truly find it with Allah, better and richer in reward. (Surah Al-Muzammil Verse 20)

The connotations of the goodly loan

This beautiful expression connotes spending in charity in the name of Allah, supporting the poor and the needy, maintaining the orphans and the helpless widows, paying the debts of the poverty-stricken and spending on one’s own family. In short all the forms of human charity are included in this concept of ‘goodly loan’ that Allah challenges the mankind with. One more form of this loan that the scholars of Islam have noted is to lend money or resources to a genuinely needy person with the intention that if he is not able to return the amount, it would be forgiven in the name of Allah.

Why does Allah attribute men’s spending for other human beings as a goodly loan unto Himself??

Allah is Eternal, the uncaused cause of everything. He has no needs of any kind. He is the fulfiller of all the needs. We all benefit from His treasures of blessings and benedictions and He grants with a magnanimous hand so that we may benefit others of our sort and be means of goodness to the servants of Allah. He has sought to arrange this special succour to reach his servants through us. He calls it a goodly loan’ which He has promised to amply compensate. We have several examples among the pious of the Ummah who immediately welcomed the opportunity. In this connection we have the famous story of Abu Al Dahdah (radhiyallahu anhu) as follows:

Abdullah bin Mas’ud (radhiyallahu anhu) narrates that when a verse, related with qard-e-hasan, the fair and goodly loan was revealed, a Companion of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) from among the Ansaar named Abu Al Dahdah presented himself before the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and asked if it was true that Allah had asked for a goodly loan. When the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) replied in the affirmative, Abu Al Dahdah requested the pleasure of holding the Prophet’s (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) hand to pledge his orchard of 600 date palm trees as the goodly loan to Allah. He later went to that garden and called his wife Umm Al Dahdah from outside its walls to come out with her household belongings as it had been presented to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) to fulfil the needs of the poor Muslims in the name of Allah. In Surah Al Hashr Verse 9, Allah has appreciated such people in these words: (Those who) give the others preference over themselves, even though poverty may afflict them. And whosoever is saved from his own avarice, such are they who are successful.Virtues and reward of the goodly loan

Following are the instances of the great virtue and reward of the goodly loan, spending in the path of Allah:

The parable of those who spend their possessions for the sake of Allah is that of a grain out of which grow seven ears, in every ear a hundred grains: for Allah wants manifold increase unto whom He wills. And Allah is Infinite, All-knowing. (Surah Al Baqara Verse 261) 

And the parable of those who spend their possessions out of a longing to please Allah, and out of their own inner certainty, is that of a garden on high fertile ground: a rainstorm smites it and thereupon it brings forth its fruit twofold; and if no rainstorm smites it, then soft rain (falls upon it). And Allah sees all that you do. (Surah Al Baqara Verse 265)

Whatever sincerity we employ while we spend in the path of Allah, it will bring a corresponding reward and recompense. There are traditions that affirm that even one penny that is spent to aid a destitute with sincerity would bring forth a reward which is up to seven hundred times the original act and even more.

In the verse No. 261 of Surah Al Baqara quoted above, two great attributes of Allah have been mentioned: The Infinite and the All-knowing which are indicative of the great bounty and plenteousness of His endowments and His great and thorough knowledge that encompass everything that a person spends as well as the intention with which it is spent. Thus both the spending and the objective of the spending are both of crucial importance. In this context, the following traditions of the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) are important to remember: 

I and the one who patronizes an orphan would be like two joined fingers in the paradise. (Bukhari) 

The one who supports the poor and the widow is like the one who goes out to fight in the path of Allah. 

The one who provides clothes to a fellow Muslim who is in need, Allah will grant him green dresses of the paradise to wear. The one who feeds a Muslim in hunger, Allah will bestow him the heavenly fruits to eat. The one who quenches the thirst of a Muslim, Allah will provide for him sealed wine of the heaven. (Abu Da’wud, Tirmidhi) 

You are granted sustenance and you are helped in your need for the sake of those who are weak and vulnerable. (Bukhari) 

The charity does not cause the wealth to be reduced. (Muslim)

Who should be the recipient of this charity ‘the beautiful loan’??
This special charity, this goodly loan can be extended to the poor relatives, orphans, widows, destitute poor people, debtors who are unable to pay back their loans and the travellers who lose their resources during their journey.

Allah has said in Surah Adh-Dhariyat Verse 19: And in all that they possess, (there is) a due share unto such as might ask (for help) and such as might suffer privation.

What to spend in charity and in the way of qard-e-hasana, the goodly loan?

In Surah Al Baqara Verse 267, Allah enjoins: O you who believe! Spend on others out of the good things which you may have acquired.

In Surah Aal-e-Imran Verse 92, it is ordained: Never shall you attain to true piety unless you spend on others out of what you cherish yourselves; and whatever you spend, verily, Allah has full knowledge thereof.

When this second verse was revealed, Abu Talha (radhiyallahu anhu) came to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and said, “O Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam), Allah has solicited the spending out of the most cherished belongings and among all my possessions I love my orchard (Bairha’) the most. I hand it out for the sake of Allah and I expect its reward and recompense from Him.” The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) replied, “O Abu Talha! You have traded it for a great advantage.”

In another tradition it is narrated that Abu Talha (radhiyallahu anhu) pleaded thus: O Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) my orchard amounting to this big sum is for voluntary charity and if I had the power to keep this charity a secret, I would have done that.

When Umar Farooq (radhiyallahu anhu) heard this verse of Surah Aal-e-Imran he also presented himself before the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and said, “Among all my possessions, I love my share of the land in Khyber and I wish to give it away in the path of Allah.” The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) said, “Make a trust of it. Hold the principle entity and give away its produce in the path of Allah.” (Bukhari and Muslim)

Muhammad bin Munkadir relates that when this verse was revealed, Zayed bin Haaritha (radhiyallahu anhu) had a very beloved horse among his belongings and he brought it to the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) and said, “This is my voluntary charity.” The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) took it from him and presented it to Zayd’s son Usama (radhiyallahu anhu). Zayd’s face exhibited signs of wonderment and awe, to this the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) responded, “Allah has accepted your charity. Now I may distribute it to anyone, be it your son, any of your relatives or a stranger.”

In short, the revelation of this one verse alone stirred an entire audience of the faithful companions (radhiyallahu anhum) to present their most cherished and prized treasures in voluntary charity and these were distributed among the needy by the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam).

Elucidation

The Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) himself had trained the great Companions (radhiyallahu anhum) and he ( sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) had perfected their faith and trust in Allah and that is why, they had a ready willingness to devote and spend each and every article of their assets in the path of Allah merely to please Him Almighty. The fabulous charitable donations of Abu Bakr Siddique (radhiyallahu anhu) at the time of the Khyber expedition and the examples of the frequent and generous spending ascribed to Usman Ghani (radhiyallahu anhu) are but two instances among thousands of others that bedeck the pages of Islamic history. We should try to follow these great examples and the least we should do is to spend in the path of Allah, give Him the goodly loan from out of our rightful and honest earnings.

The elements that render this fair and goodly loan effective and fruitful ineffective and fruitless

These include show-off and ostentation, the desire to be known as a charitable and magnanimous person and to adopt a sarcastic and ironical attitude towards those whom one gives charity.

Allah has so beautifully described the factors that spoil or enhance the good effects of qard-e-hasana in Surah Al Baqara Verses 262-265:

‘They who spend their possessions for the sake of Allah and do not thereafter mar their spending by stressing their own benevolence and hurting (the feelings of the needy) shall have their reward with their Sustainer, and they need not have any fear, and neither shall they grieve.

A kind word and the veiling of another’s need is better than a charitable deed followed by hurt; and Allah is Self Sufficient, Forebearing.

‘O you who have attained to faith! Do not deprive your charitable deeds of all worth by stressing your own benevolence and hurting (the feelings of the needy), as does he who spends his wealth only to be seen and praised by men, and believes not in Allah and the Last Day: for his parable is that of a smooth rock with (a little) earth upon it and then a rainstorm smites it and leaves it hard and bare. Such as these shall have no gain whatever from all their (good) works: for Allah does not guide people who refuse to acknowledge the truth.

‘And the parable of those who spend their possessions out of a longing to please Allah, and out of their own inner certainty, is that of a garden on high, fertile ground: A rainstorm smites it, and thereupon it brings forth its fruit twofold; and if no rainstorm smites it, soft rains (falls upon it). And Allah sees all that you do.’

Spending in the path of Allah even during straitened and distressed circumstances

Allah is so kind and benevolent that He becomes happy with His servants even when they spend out of their meagre resources and small fortunes. The only condition is sincerity and good intention. We should be ready to be charitable even in the times of difficulty and austerity.

Allah appreciates His servants thus in Surah Aal-e-Imran Verse No. 134: ‘Those who spend in time of plenty and in time of hardship and hold in check their anger, and pardon their fellow-men because Allah loves the doers of good.’

A similar accolade has been stated in Surah Al Baqara Verse No. 177: ‘And he who spends his affluence, however much he may cherish it, upon his near of kin, and the orphans, and the needy and the wayfarer, and the beggars, and for the freeing of the human beings from bondage, and is constant in prayer, and renders the purifying dues to the poor.’

Once the Prophet (sallallaahu alayhi wasallam) was asked about the best form of charity and he replied: “Spending in the condition when you are healthy and full of life and while you are afraid of becoming poor and have desire to be prosperous.” (Bukhari and Muslim)

Allah has made wealth an indispensable means of human life and has taught man how to earn it but he has kept the end of all his efforts in His own hand. He can expand the material resources of whomsoever He wills and he can also constrict these. He has formulated an entire economic system within the auspices of Islamic Law that governs human quest for material sustenance. This system has been delegated even more beautiful and enriching by introducing voluntary charity, sadaqaat as well as fixed poor’s-due (zakat).

Allah has made us inter-dependent and He is consistently watching our actions as to where we earn from and where we spend our earnings. On the Day of Judgment, according to the Prophetic traditions, we shall not be able to move an inch towards absolution unless we justify the means we adopted to earn money and the ends where we utilized it.

The historical tragedy of Kashmir conflict goes way back in history. The political and cultural invasion started in 1585 with Mughal king, Akbar entrapping and imprisoning Yousuf Shah Chak, the king of Kashmir. Chak’s forces had earlier defeated the invading forces of King Akbar of India. Having failed in defeating the Kashmiri warriors outright he devised a devious scheme of controlling Kashmir by inviting the Kashmir ruler as a guest and then putting him in prison.

Then came the Afghan occupation at the end of Mughal rule in 1752. The Mughal and Afghan rule though an occupation, was not necessarily colonial in its modus operandi. Kashmir did enjoy a period of independence before the Sikh rule. Afghan rule was replaced by the Sikh occupation which put an end to that period of self rule.

Sikh rule was engineered through joint conspiracies of Ranjit Singh, a Sikh; Birbal, a Pundit from the Valley; and Ghulab Singh, a Dogra Hindu from Jammu.. The common cause among these parties was to end the Muslim rule in Jammu and Kashmir. After two failed attempts Sikhs ( under Ranjit Singh ) occupied Jammu and Kashmir in 1819.The Sikh rule was a tyranny that lasted 28 years and came to an end after its treacherous relationship with the British rulers.

The British colonialists used Ghulab Singh, a Dogra Hindu and a trusted army officer in the Sikh dynasty, in engineering a defeat of the Sikhs. Ghulab Singh`s role as a quisling was not just to help his new British masters, but primarily to get Jammu and Kashmir for himself. He had such intentions way before Sikh rule disintegrated as indicated by the Lahore Treaty of March 9, 1846. By assisting them in defeating the Sikhs, Ghulab Singh ensured that the British grant him his wish of getting Jammu and Kashmir for himself. It culminated in the signing of the infamous Treaty of Amritsar on March 16, 1846. Britain allegedly sold Jammu and Kashmir to Ghulab Singh for a paltry sum of 7.5 million rupees, (150 thousand dollars in current exchange rate) though some doubt that any money changed hands as documents of this transaction have not been found in East India Company records.

As a consequence of the Amritsar Treaty a reign of terror was unleashed by the Dogra dynasty on Kashmiris. A sample of this oppression can be gleaned from the following written account of a London Times correspondent, E. F. Knight who entered Jammu and Kashmir on July 1, 1862.

“The native of this state suffers from a form of oppression far more severe than the extortion of the tax collectors; the latter at least leaves him a bare subsistence, but that of which I am now speaking signifies separation from family and in too many cases torture and death. I have already alluded to beggar, or forced labor.”

Muslim anger culminated in the July, 1931 Kashmiri uprising when a hero by the name of Abdul Qadeer inspired the Muslims to rise against tyranny. He was arrested by Dogra gestapo after he delivered a fiery speech in a gathering at Khanqah-i-Mualla. July 13, 1931 massacre occurred when Abdul Qadeer was arrested by Dogra rulers and put on trial for his role in the Kashmiri uprising against the ruthless rule.

July 13, 1931 was a watershed event in the history of Kashmir. It was followed by rise of puppet Sheikh Abdullah to national prominence as a leader of the liberation movement (Muslim Conference ) and against the Dogra tyranny. Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah the leader of Muslim League visited Srinagar in 1935 to extend his support to this Liberation movement. In 1938 Muslim Conference was converted into National Conference by Abdullah to appease pro India elements. Mr. Nehru visited Srinagar and appealed to Pandits to join National Conference in order to strengthen Adullah who had come under Indian National Congress influence. A web of intrigues and conspiracies with ultimate capitulation of Sheikh Abdullah to the nefarious designs of Hindus became the prelude to what followed: end of the British rule in India, partition of the Subcontinent and active agitation by the people of Jammu and Kashmir forcing the Dogra King, Hari Singh to flee to Jammu, the summer capital of Jammu and Kashmir.

Mountbatten, Nehru, Menon and Abdullah were the architects of a concocted piece of paper called the ‘Article of Accession’, flouting the principle of association of various states of the Subcontinent either with India or Pakistan according to their free will. They committed a treacherous act of enslavement of a nation against its wishes. After seeing that the majority of the people of Jammu and Kashmir were eager to join Pakistan, Nehru with the help of his intimate friend, Mountbatten invaded Jammu and Kashmir on October 27, 1947 thereby laying a precedence for preemptive invasion of a sovereign Nation, the occupation of its land and oppression its people.

A valiant resistance by Kashmiri`s threatening India`s colonialist designs forced India to go to the UN Security Council for intervention. The Council passed multiple resolutions on different dates regarding Kashmir. The gist of the Resolutions being that people of Jammu and Kashmir be given the right to self-determination to decide their future.

But, Indian authorities from Nehru to current rulers have played a very devious, downright dirty and blatantly deceptive role in defying the will of the world body, reneged on promises made in the Tashkand and Simla Agreements and public declarations made to the Kashmiris and Pakistan by Nehru, the first prime minister of India to allow Kashmiris their right to self- determination. India has done every thing in its power to maintain its occupation of Kashmir.

Farcical elections with the collaboration of their puppets had been one of its weapons of deception at least until 1987, when Muslim United Front, a conglomerate of various political parties was about to win the elections. Indian Government and their stooges engineered to steal the election following which started the armed struggle in 1989.

Jammu and Kashmir is occupied by about 700,000 Indian military and para military personnel who have martyred over 100,000 innocent civilians, indulged in torture, rape, pillage, arson and destruction of the socio-economic fabric of Kashmiri society. The people of Jammu and Kashmir continue to light the candle of freedom hoping one day to realize their dream of liberty.

[By Jonathan Azaziah]

Torture. Secret prisons. Rape. Incessant murder of civilians. Military-enforced curfew. Suppression of information. Kidnappings. Property destruction. Ethnic cleansing. Scorched earth policies. Protests. Mass graves. Humiliation. Beatings. Missing persons. Intimidation. Occupation. No, this is not a description of the life of Palestinians under the 68 year occupation of the Zionist entity. No, this is not a description of the life of civilians living under brutal US-UK military occupation in Iraq or Afghanistan. This is a description of the life of civilians in Kashmir, under the despicable, savage and inhumane Indian occupation which has been in place for 66 years. Palestine has been politicized over and over by corrupt Arab and Muslim leaders. It has been used for propaganda by Western politicians vying for support from the Zionist lobby by bowing down to Israel, as well as the Zionist media to disseminate the ‘Israel is the victim’ theme and smear Palestinian Resistance. Kashmir however, isn’t even mentioned at all. It is disregarded by the dictators and monarchies of the Middle East. It is disregarded by the Zionist puppets and demagogues of the West. Kashmir has become a forgotten occupation (1).

Criminal Partition and The Armed Forces Special Powers Act

Kashmir has always been an independent nation with its own language, its own natural resources which provided self-sustainment and autonomy, and its own rich, ancient, and distinct culture, completely separate from India (2). Before the British Raj officially came into being in 1858, the British colonialists already had vast amounts of soldiers occupying several parts of the South-eastern Asian subcontinent including Kashmir, which they wanted to strip of its history and absorb into their growing Indian empire. Despite sincere, dedicated Resistance from the people, the British sold Kashmir into monarchical oppression in 1846, making the Dogra dynasty the undisputed rulers of the Valley. The Dogras committed a century of atrocities against the Kashmiris, culminating on August 26, 1947 when the dynasty, armed with British weaponry, opened fire on an enormous crowd of protesters in Poonch, murdering hundreds in cold blood. The fall of the dynasty opened the doors for Britain’s partition and India’s occupation (3).

Britain left India cracked in half, sectioning off a state predominantly comprised of Muslims in Pakistan, and a state predominantly comprised of Hindus in India. This left Kashmir stuck in the middle of a criminal partition process. The greater majority of Kashmir’s people wanted their autonomy returned to them, and they protested day and night, demanding their self-determination. Due to its relationship with the Dogras however, and its inherent distrust of Muslim leadership in what was to become Pakistan, Britain decided to award Kashmir to India. The dynasty was liquidated only in name, as the heirs to the Dogra throne exchanged kingship for the position of Kashmir Prime Minister. Britain’s Viceroy of India, Lord Mountbatten, manipulated the Radcliffe Commission, which was in charge of allotting territory to India and Pakistan, so the (predominantly Muslim) Gurdaspur district of the Punjab region would be illogically assigned to India. Gurdaspur connected India to Kashmir via an easy-to-reach land route. Without Gurdaspur, India would have no access to Kashmir. Lord Mountbatten favored the Indian leadership which still maintained benevolence towards Britain, whereas Pakistan’s leadership was looking for complete independence. Kashmir became a casualty of Lord Mountbatten’s evil meddling. It was transformed into the property of the occupier (4). The worthless United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 47, guaranteeing the people of Kashmir the right to self-determination, but it has never been enforced. Kashmir has been occupied by no fewer than 5,00,000-7,00,000 Indian military terrorists at all times since 1947, making it the most militarized zone on the planet (5).

On August 18th, 1958, India’s government passed the Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) to completely absolve the military of any wrongdoing no matter what kind of crime it may commit. Essentially, it gave India’s military the authority to shoot and kill with impunity. It has led to more than 50 years of repulsive human rights violations, and it is a central contributing factor to the unrest in occupied Kashmir today. Several elite international organizations have demanded that the AFSPA be repealed, including the UN though it doesn’t enforce this request either. Activists across Kashmir and India as well have struggled to end the AFSPA to no avail. India’s government has stonewalled their efforts, arrested them, and in certain instances, illegally imprisoned them (6).

Indian Crimes Against Humanity and US Support

Since 1989 alone, 1,00,243 Kashmiri civilians have been murdered by India’s security forces. 107,351 children have been orphaned. 22,728 women have been widowed. 9,920 women have been gang raped or molested by India’s military. 1,18,060 Kashmiris were illegally arrested and incarcerated. 1,05,861 houses, places of business, mosques, and other architectural structures were razed, and countless people have gone missing (7). 2,900 mass graves were discovered at the end of 2009, containing the bodies of 2,943 civilians from 55 villages across Northern Kashmir. Indian military, paramilitary, and security forces were the culprits. Not a single complaint was made against them, and no committee or body was set up by the Indian regime to investigate the horrors (8).

Torture cells and interrogation centers are infused with Kashmir’s daily life; they’ve been around since the beginning days of British partition. Sexual abuse, electrocution, merciless beatings, soaking prisoners with freezing cold water, undressing the prisoners in front of each other and locking crowds together in the same cell are only some of the tactics used by India’s military (9). Over 6,000 Indian soldiers stationed in occupied Kashmir suffer from the AIDS virus, but haven’t been pulled from active duty. Their mysterious contraction of the disease has never been investigated. The sexual abuse against Kashmiris, especially women and children, is as rampant as ever. AIDS has now spread throughout Kashmir at an alarming rate, stemming directly from abusive sexual contact between security forces and civilians, in what most certainly appears to be another extension of collective punishment issued by the Indian regime (10).

Videos have recently emerged that expose the Indian occupier’s humiliation of Kashmir’s civilians. In one video, recorded in low-quality definition on a cell phone, four young Kashmiris were stripped naked by paramilitary troopers and forced to walk through the streets as they were taunted and hit with batons. In another video, an old man is beaten by the military with no justification whatsoever. In another video, young girls are harassed with the most putrid vulgarities. As expected, Youtube and Facebook, havens for Zionist censorship and data-mining (11), removed the videos, citing nonsensical nudity violations. Mainstream Indian papers and television media haven’t mentioned these human rights violations at all. Neither has the Zionist-owned Western media. It is disgraceful (12).

The US has directly funded India with hundreds of millions of dollars for decades, up until 2008 in which the foreign aid was reduced to $81 million per year (13). War criminal George W. Bush, in a meeting with war criminal Manmohan Singh in 2005, declared that a strategic, global partnership between the US and India including increased military, economic , scientific and technical ties was necessary to promote peace throughout the world (14). This of course, is Orwellian doublespeak for promoting war and chaos wherever the two powers would roam. The Indo-US Civilian Nuclear Agreement, signed by Bush and Singh in the same year as their historic meeting, was nothing but a nuclear arms deal that included enrichment technology and equipment designed for weaponizing nuclear materials (15). Bush’s neo-con administration contrived this deal to prop up India as a regional superpower and keep Pakistan at bay through subversive destabilization.

Since Singh’s only objection to the deal was finding the necessary funds to keep India’s nuclear program flowing, it was none other than Zionist Paul Wolfowitz, the murderous architect of the illegal occupation of Iraq, that suggested loans to India from the World Bank, where he served as President at the time (16). By possessing US-designed nuclear technology, the Indian occupier has been emboldened even further in Kashmir, intimidating the people with threats of nuclear genocide with Pakistan (17). Though Zionist warmonger Obama has been completely silent on Kashmir since taking office (18), he has taken no issue with undermining Kashmir’s Resistance. Zionist Daniel Benjamin, who wrote a paper with Zionist Steven Simon entitled ‘Obama Is The Friend Israel Needs (19),’ was appointed by one of the Zionist entity’s favorite mouthpieces, Hillary Clinton, as Coordinator for Counter-terrorism at the Department of State. It was Benjamin that negotiated the transfer of $4.5 million to India’s regime for anti-terrorism programs, in addition to the aid already allocated each year (20), and it is Benjamin that has been instrumental in spreading propaganda regarding the Mumbai false flag, linking Kashmiri Resistance to bogus offshoots of ‘Al Qaeda’ with absolutely no evidence (21).

Israel: India’s Occupation Advisor

The Zionist entity and India have had deep-rooted, lucrative relations since India recognized Israel’s illegitimate statehood on September 17th, 1950. This relationship was always covert due to India taking precautionary measures to prevent its own Muslim population and financial allies in the Arab world from interfering through protest or other political means. The Tel Aviv regime provided India with arms, ammunition and military hardware during its wars with China in 1962, and its two wars with Pakistan in 1965 and 1971. In return, India secretly sent military equipment to Israel during the 1967 war. India’s security forces began receiving training in Israel as early as 1980, and throughout the decade, Israeli and Indian intelligence collaborated in the formulation of a plan to destroy Pakistan’s nuclear facilities. In 1986, architect of the first genocidal campaign against Iraq, Zionist Stephen Solarz, met with Prime Minister Gandhi and a high ranking Israeli lobby official from New York, Morris Abraham, to begin paving the way for overt relations. This lengthy process culminated in 1992 with the opening of an Indian embassy in Tel Aviv, and a Zionist embassy in New Delhi (22).

Since the establishment of open relations, Israel has transferred laser guided missiles, tanks, submarines and other naval craft, an anti-ballistic missile system, electronic warfare systems, and hi-tech surveillance equipment to the Indian regime. In July of 1997, mass murderer Benjamin Netanyahu boldly proclaimed, “Our ties with India don’t have any limits (23).” In 2002, India signed a deal with the Zionist entity to replace its out-of-date artillery, and contracted for more than 3,000 Israeli-designed Tavor rifles which its soldiers would use in occupied Kashmir to quell Resistance and tyrannize demonstrators (24).

War criminal and notorious butcher of the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps, Ariel Sharon, and war criminal of the Kargil conflict, Prime Minister of India at the time Atal Bihari Vajpayee, signed the ‘Delhi Statement on Friendship and Cooperation between India and Israel.’ Vajpayee couldn’t have carried out his policies in Kargil without Israel rushing military support to the Indian army at the height of the war (25). The Sharon-Vajpayee agreement led to Israel continuing its 1980s policy of training thousands upon thousands of Indian forces in counter-insurgency, but outwardly. Subsequently, in 2004, Mossad and Shin Bet officials arrived in India to train its army in gathering intelligence in areas with ‘high militancy activity.’ All of the training and technology that India acquired from Israel greatly assisted its genocidal occupation of Kashmir (26). Similar to the Zionist theft of water in occupied Palestine and the poisoning of aquifers to stricken Palestinians with disease (27), India is building dams in occupied Kashmir to damage its agriculture, and cut its people off from the agriculture imported from Pakistan (28). It is a classic form of slow drip genocide.

The Alliance Between Mossad and RAW

In 2007, Sayyed Ali Shah Geelani, one of the leading Resistance leaders in occupied Kashmir, publicly accused Israel’s Mossad of aiding and abetting India to obliterate the Kashmiri freedom struggle. He remarked that the tactics chosen by India’s military in the Valley were the same tactics used by Mossad against the Palestinians (29). The Sayyed’s accusations are fully supported by evidence. Israeli intelligence and India’s Research Analysis Wing (RAW) have been sharing information since the 1970s. 40,000 Israeli tourists have been visiting Jammu and Kashmir for decades, and it has recently been revealed that Mossad was given approval by RAW to conduct surveillance operations in the Valley by posing as tourists (30). An elite counter-terrorism unit, led by commander Eli Katzir, has been operating in Kashmir since 2000 to ‘reduce the incidence of terrorist incursions from Pakistan (31).’

Israeli companies with longstanding connections to Mossad and Shin Bet have been working in the Indian fields of research and development, nano-technology, biotech, high-end security software development, and non-conventional energy since open relations between the two oppressive entities began. The companies include Amdocs, the infamous company connected to Mossad’s 9/11 false flag founded by Zionist criminal Morris Kahn, Ness Technologies, headed by Sachi Gerlitz, a senior IOF official that formerly worked for Comverse, another firm connected to 9/11, Magic Software Enterprises, founded by David Assia and Yaki Dunietz, a firm that provides software to IOF, Check Point Software Technologies, founded by former IOF programming specialists Gil Shwed, Shlomo Kramer and Marius Nacht, RAD Data Communications, founded by former head of the Electronic Research Department of Israel’s Ministry of Defense Zohar Zisapel and his brother Yehuda, Veraz Networks, a subsidiary of ECI Telecom, headed by former senior official in Israeli Aircraft Industries, Rafi Maor, and NDS Group, a firm accused of hacking into the satellites of other companies and unraveling their encryption schemes, owned by Abe Peled, a former technical officer in IOF (32).

During the course of Sayyed Geelani’s aforementioned public comments, he also accused the Indian occupier of ‘trying to hoodwink Kashmir’s youth by forcing them to the path of drug addiction.’ Once again, the Resistance leader’s accusations proved to be entirely accurate. A recently declassified document from RAW has leaked critical information regarding the Indian intelligence agency, in partnership with Mossad, hiring Indian drug lords and mafia barons to transport opium across Indian and Pakistani borders into occupied Kashmir. The money raised from these illicit narcotics transactions would fund the establishment of 57 counter-terrorism training camps in and around Kashmir (33).

In 2001, RAW and Mossad created four new agencies to target high-ranking officials in the religious, political and intelligence sectors in Pakistan. The goal of these agencies was to destabilize Pakistan, divide it and conquer it by inciting sectarianism through bombings in highly-populated areas. Per the suggestion of Mossad officials in India, Tel Aviv also erected an electric barrier fence with thermal imaging devices on the border of the Punjab region and Jammu and Kashmir. RAW obsessively engaged in disinformation and propaganda campaigns against Pakistan, as well as sabotage, and espionage (34). The Zionist media and its expert propagandists along with RAW trained ‘investigative reporters’ disseminated a series of false reports regarding Pakistan’s army committing human rights violations in the Swat Valley in 2009. This operation was designed to cover up the disturbing ruthlessness that the Indian military had inflicted against Kashmiri adolescents in the summer of that year (35).

The latest act of RAW and Mossad collaboration came in January of 2008 when war criminal Singh’s regime launched an Israeli satellite into orbit. The operation wasn’t mentioned by India’s controlled media due to ‘sensitivities,’ but Israel’s media services boasted about the satellite substantially assisting the Zionist entity in monitoring Iran. The Tecsar satellite, a product of Mossad-dominated Israeli Aerospace Industries (36), is one of the most advanced of its kind, capable of transmitting high resolution images even in severe weather conditions. The technology was specifically designed to violate Iran’s sovereignty by penetrating its security networks to spy on its nuclear program. India would use the satellite to monitor Resistance activity in occupied Kashmir (37).

Conclusion: The Current Climate and The Future

After 63 years of arguably the most barbarous occupation in modern history and 21 years of armed struggle against its oppressors, Kashmir is nowhere closer to peace now than it was before Britain’s abject partitioning. The newest stage of unrest began in June, when a teenager was murdered by the military with a tear gas grenade. Since that crime was committed, the occupier has taken the lives of 109 innocent people, including women and children (38). The worst day of violence came on September 13th, when India’s trigger-happy military opened fire on a crowd of tens of thousands of demonstrators, massacring 18 innocents and injuring more than 100 others (39).

India’s controlled press blamed the protests on Press TV, an Iranian news agency, broadcasting coverage of the despicable burning of the Qur’an in the US. These reports however, were shoddy at best, the work of RAW propagandists at worst, and they were released to cover up what Kashmiris were really protesting about: Non-stop Indian military brutality (40). Press TV was kicked off of the air on the day of the massacre when India’s government placed a ban on the station through local cable operators (41). Due to India’s intelligence relationship with the Zionist entity, and the launching of the satellite to spy on the Islamic Republic, it is reasonable to infer that Press TV was eliminated from the airwaves due to its updated, detailed, unbiased reporting of the humanitarian crisis in occupied Kashmir.

Kashmir’s Resistance leaders, including the aforesaid Sayyed Ali Shah Geelani, have all been detained and placed on house arrest on numerous occasions. Newspapers have been removed from circulation for days at a time. Journalists are subjected to abductions, beatings, death threats, attempted murder and are hindered by severe movement restrictions (42). The most recent journalist assaulted was Farooq Ahmed Shah, a photographer who was beaten by India’s paramilitary forces with bamboo sticks (43). Chief Minister Omar Abdallah, a collaborationist puppet of Singh’s murderous regime, along with his cabinet stooges, have issued weak public statements regarding the right to freedom of the press in the Valley needing to be respected, but have done absolutely nothing to stop the suppression of information (44). Kashmiris are disgusted with Abdallah, the latest in a line of puppet politicians chosen through rigged elections by the Indian oppressor since the occupation’s inception (45). The Indian media reported on the police officers suspended after a shoe was thrown at Abdallah (46), but it didn’t expose the details as to why such an act would occur. Abdallah isn’t defending the rights of Kashmir’s people, he is watching them bleed for a little slice of power.

Kashmiris are suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder, especially children (47). Due to the efforts of RAW and Mossad, one third of Kashmiris in the age group of 15-40 suffer from substance abuse. Kashmiri students are denied accommodation in New Dehli universities (48). The violence against women in Kashmir by the occupier, hasn’t decreased; quite to the contrary. India’s military frequently uses rape as a weapon (49).

This oppression only worsens as India, and to a lesser extent, Pakistan, continue to occupy Kashmir. Indian lawmakers have launched a mission to end the unrest in the Valley (50). This is just as ridiculous as the peace talks farce taking place between Zionist war criminals Netanyahu, Obama, Mubarak, ‘King’ Abdullah and the Palestinian traitor, Mahmoud Abbas. The lawmakers have no intention of removing India’s military presence from Kashmir, and therefore, this is nothing more than another political publicity stunt. In a recent poll conducted by the Hindustan Times, 66% of Kashmiris said that they want complete freedom from all foreign powers, so Jammu and Kashmir can once again be restored as an independent nation state (51). Sayyed Geelani recently remarked that, “Kashmiris would prefer to die one by one than surrender before India (52).”

Kashmir is not a territorial dispute between India and Pakistan. Kashmir is not a religious dispute between Muslims and Hindus. The conflict in occupied Kashmir is a matter of self-determination, which is the universal right of all indigenous peoples and their respective lands. The brutal Indian occupier kills with impunity. It enforces its reign of terror with Israeli weaponry and a military trained in the methods of Mossad torture. It has destroyed and taken the lives of hundreds of thousands of people since 1947.

But Kashmiris have not weakened. They have not been broken. They still march defiantly through the streets despite curfew. They protest daily. They still sing, dance, pray, and meditate though the occupier awaits them outside of their homes and their mosques. Such a sincere, beautiful Resistance can never be defeated. Soon, the Indian occupier will admit it has been trounced and it will remove its troops from the Valley. Pakistan will honor the will of Kashmir’s people, and remove its forces as well. The people will determine who their government will be without the hidden hands of the occupier pulling the strings. And the chants will be heard from Srinagar to Poonch. Baramullah to Kishtwar. Uri to Kargil. Kupwara to Samba. Doda to Gaoran. AZADI! AZADI! AZADI!

~ The End ~

Sources:

(1) The World Wants To Think The Best About India. So We Turn Our Back On Kashmir by Dean Nelson

Nowruz is here! The Pre-Islamic, Persian-Majoosi (Zoroastrian) holiday and of course anything pagan, especially pre-Islamic Persian customs do have their deep connections with the religion of the Twelver Shias. Nowruz is the holiest day according to Zoroastrianism (Majoosism) of the year for them out of seven major holidays (the seven motif is straight from their beliefs, with Ahura Mazda co-existing with six other gods who in turn form a unity of seven, so no surprise the holiday centres now with setting out a table of seven things also called haft seen).

What many don’t know (even many Shias, heck even many Persian Shias) is that Nowruz, the ancient Zoroastrian holiday is not just some traditional holiday celebrated mostly by Iranians and Kurds (and some Afghans, even among the very secular Sunni ones), no, rather it is an ESSENTIAL part of Shiism and the biggest Shia scholars who ever lived have not just sanctified it, rather they declared it as the best day ever and ascribed loads of rubbish, fabricated an disturbing narrations to the Ahl Al-Bayt who all happen (as usual) to attack the Sahabah and the Ummah and to praise pre-Islamic Persian customs!

The first people to accept the A’maal or Fazail were the representatives of Hawzah Ilmiyyah Najaf Al-Ashraf, meaning personalities like Shaykh Tusi, then Seyed Ibnay Taus and Mohaqqiq Tusi, Syed Sharif, Allama Bahauddin Amili, Allama Faiz Kashani, and from Allama Majlisi to Shaykh Abbas Qummi (author of Mafatih Al-Jinan).

all agree on this day of celebration. Seyed Mohsin Al-Amin Amili in his Miftahal Jannat, Vol 3, pg 573, depicts a hadith from Mu’ala Bin Khanees on the Fazael of Nowruz, and has confirmed it with high authority. It’s the following:

Al-Mu’alla narrates from Imam Al-Sadiq : “Nowruz is no other day but the one we [the Ahl Al-Bayt] are awaiting the reappearance [of Al-Mahdi], for it is one of our days that was protected by the Persians and carelessly lost by you.”

Mullah Baqir Al-Majlisi (major Shia scholar of the Safavid era) mentions a narration from Musa Al-Kadhim (son of Jafar Al-Sadiq) which says: `In Nowruz Allah made a covenant with His servants to worship Him and not to allow any partner for Him. To welcome, His messengers and obey their rulings. This day is the ﬁrst day that the fertile wind blow and the ﬂowers on the earth appeared. The archangel Gabriel (a) appeared to the Prophet, and it is the day that Abraham (as) broke the idols. The day Prophet Muhammad held Ali a.s on his shoulders to destroy the Quraishies’ idols in the house of God, the Kaaba.`[…]

Their “Mahdi” (in fact the Dajjaal) will emerge on the ZOROASTRIAN holiday of Nowruz!

[Narration attributed to Imam Al-Sadiq (rahimahullah) who is free of Majoosite Rafidhism]: ‘The day of Nowruz is the day when our Qa’im of Ahl Al-Bayt (Mahdi) and the commanders [of his army] will rise. On that day Allah will make the Dajjaal appear and he will be crucified on the church of Kufa (Iraq)’. (Bihar Al-Anwar by Mulla Baqir Al-Majlisi, vol. 52, p. 308)

Kufa?? Crucifixion?? NOWRUZ???! We all know that JESUS (‘Eesa alayhissalaam) will kill the Dajjaal, not on the holy day of Shiism though, which is NOWRUZ!

So the Sahabah, their students and their students (i.e. Salaf Al-Saleh) have missed to ‘protect’ the holy (!) day of Nowruz, but the Persians managed to protect this so called holy day. Look at their audacity! How dare they ascribe a Zoroastrian holiday to Islam and the Ahl Al-Bayt! Not even the most wicked Islamic sects has ever dared to ascribe any pre-Islamic pagan Arabic holiday (there were some) to Islam!

This is how portray the Ahl Al-Bayt i.e. Imam Al-Sadiq (rahimahullah) in the Hadith above! He literally blames the Arabs for having forgotten the Majoosi holiday of Nowruz! A holiday that was never ever sanctified in Islam! Look how much Sassanian-Pre-Islamic-Persian customs have infiltrated Shiism, then they wonder why they are being called Majoos!

So Shias out there, we know it’s a shame to be a Shia, but come on, you have no choice, get up and celebrate Nowruz you pagans, and don’t forget to recite certain prayers on that day, and to take Ghusl on that day … all in the name of ‘following the Ahl Al-Bayt and the true Sunnah’ (true Sunnah!!!):

[…] But Alameh Majlesi in his book Zad al Maad mentions the existence of some reports in some less known sources. One of which is the following invocation that is highly recommended to be recited repeatedly. O Moulder of the hearts and vision, O Master of the night and day, O He who changes stratagem and status, Transform our situation to the best condition The above invocation at the time of Safavids was a regular prayer for the New Year. The fact that recitation of supplications or Qur’an and performing of prayer for the coming of a new year actually did happen, itself, is a sign of the Islamisation of this festivity. […]

[…] Islamic rituals of Nowruz In Mafatih al Jinan, which in the past decades has been one of the greatest books for religious recommended acts of worship, we read that the Prayer of Nowruz is a prayer combined of recitation of Al -Fatiha, Al-Qadr, Al-Kaferoon, Al-Tawhid, Al-Falagh, Al-Nass and many other chapters of the Holy Qur’an. It is similar to a prayer which not only has the forms of Friday prayer but also the attributes of the prayers of Ghadeer Khum. Mafatih Al Jinan narrates from Imam Jafar Al Sadiq(as): `When Nowruz comes, make Ghusl (ceremonial wash) , put on your clean clothes, and fragrant yourself with best perfumes, so when you are free of all other prayers, perform a four- rakaat prayer, each rakaat one Salam and in the ﬁrst rakaat after Sura Al- Fateha ten times Sura Al-Qadr, and in the second rakaat after Al-Fateha ten times Al-Kaferoon. In the thried rakaat after Al-Feteheh ten times Al-Nass and Al-Falaq. After prayer prostrate in gratiﬁcation.` […]

they even give lectures about Nowruz and Shi’ism and they celebrate it in their wasteful golden shrines, all in the name of ‘the Islam of the Ahl Al-Bayt’

Iranian pilgrims in Iraq (which is basically occupied by Iran with the help of the Americans and Iraqi Shia puppets) celebrate NOWRUZ next to the shrine of Al-Hussein Ibn Ali (radhiyallahu anhu) in Karbala’. That’s what these heretics call ‘the Islam of the Ahl Al-Bayt, the true followers of the Sunnah’!